BCCI

Lodha Committee suggested reforms turns up the heat on BCCI bigwigs

Ranji Trophy (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Will the Mumbai Cricket Association, Maharashtra Cricket Association and Vidarbha Cricket Association be merged into one state body?

That’s the loaded question the BCCI hopes to discover answers to when the Lodha Committee  make a fresh set of recommendations on January 4 next year.

It is believed that the committee is keen on reducing over-representation from Maharashtra and Gujarat in the BCCI.

Gujarat has three Ranji associations too: Saurashtra Cricket Association, Baroda Cricket Association and Gujarat Cricket Association.

Andhra Pradesh has two but Hyderabad could be assimilated into the new state of Telengana.

These reforms could deal a body blow to Mumbai cricket and its rich traditions.

Mumbai have 40 Ranji victories to their credit in the tourney’s multi-storied history.

The record books indicate 16 Irani Cup, two Vijay Hazare Trophy, five Wills Trophy, and a single Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy.

CCI Mumbai – Main entrance: lobby of the club house with replica of original Ranji Trophy as centerpiece. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Mumbai cricket team was formed under the Bombay Presidency and continued as part of the Bombay province until independence in 1947 when Bombay became Bombay state.

The formation of Maharashtra led to the assimilation of the city into its boundaries and it was made its capital.

Bombay continued as a separate Ranji team and continues to compete separately from Maharashtra state.

The Vidarbha cricket team was founded in 1957.

The Maharashtra cricket team has two Ranji trophy wins to its credit coming in 1939/40 and 1940/41.

Saurashtra are another side that have clinched the national title winning in 1936-37 and were also runners up in the very next season of 1937-38.

Baroda are five-time victors: 2000-01, 1957-58, 1949-50,  1946-47, and 1942-43.

They were established in 1930.

The Gujarat Cricket Association were founded in 1950.

There are 27 teams in the Ranji set-up.

19 State teams are currently participating in the tournament.

The Lodha Committee may also consider disallowing BCCI officials from holding positions in their state bodies.

This is purportedly to prevent a conflict of interest.

The implementation of this would be interesting—to put it mildly.

The ICC too functions like the BCCI with national cricket association heads elected to the ICC executive.

Similarly, the FIFA executive functions by appointing members from its respective confederations:

• CONMEBOL: one vice-president and two members
• AFC: one vice-president and three members
• UEFA: two vice-presidents and five members
• CAF: one vice-president and three members
• CONCACAF: one vice-president and two members
• OFC: one vice-president

What the Lodha Committee suggests is that the BCCI should function like the United Nations with country representatives differing from national heads.

This could be workable only if there are sufficiently experienced administrators available to be elected both at the state and national level.

Is that the case?

Is this an attempt to create more positions and thus more opportunities for both experienced and budding sports administrators within the annals of power within the BCCI and its member associations? That surely is not the mandate of the Lodha committee.

This could also be an ‘insidious’ attempt to bring the BCCI under the purview of the proposed Sports Bill which does not envisage more than three terms for an individual at the helm of any National Sports Federation with a cooling off period after two terms. Presidents are exempted from the cooling off period.

Office bearers are also to retire at 70.

The proposed Sports Bill (in 2013) sought to make the BCCI accountable to the general public by making it liable to respond to Right To Information (RTI) applications about its functioning.

Indranil Basu , reporting for CricBuzz, writes:

“The general belief within the BCCI is that the acumen and experience gained from being part of the board helps the administrators run their state bodies better. It is also believed that staying in the loop would only help streamline the system.

Drawing a parallel with the country’s political system, the board members said that it would create a situation where the ministers serving the government would not be allowed to be a part of the Parliament or legislative bodies. It simply can’t work. Today the board has an asset worth Rs 10,000 crore. In the last six years, the board has paid Rs 100 crore as income tax and gets the country around Rs 400 crore worth of foreign exchange every year. When India won the first World Cup in 1983, the board didn’t have Rs 2 lakh to honour its world champions. We are a professional body and deserve that respect, the official said.”

The most ‘damaging’ reform suggested may be the one that would prevent industrialists and politicians from participating in BCCI politics.

That would really set the cat among the pigeons.

Matter of policy: BCCI’s bone density test for age deemed admissible by Bombay High Court

Your real age is what your bone density test says you are.

The above is the edict of the Bombay High Court dismissing a petition from young cricketer Sagar Chhabria challenging his declared ineligibility for an Under-16 tournament.

The Tanner-Whitehouse Test (TW3) determined that Sagar was in fact 16-and-a-half and thus overage.

Honourable judges, SC Dharmadhikari and Justice BP Colabawalla,  declared that chronological age such as birth certificates and passport are insufficient—specifically for sporting activities.

Wikipedia states:

“Bone age is the degree of maturation of a child’s bones. As a person grows from fetal life through childhood, puberty, and finishes growth as a young adult, the bones of the skeleton change in size and shape. These changes can be seen by x-ray. The ‘bone age’ of a child is the average age at which children reach this stage of bone maturation. A child’s current height and bone age can be used to predict adult height. For most people, their bone age is the same as their biological age but for some individuals, their bone age is a couple years older or younger. Those with advanced bone ages typically hit a growth spurt early on but stop growing early sooner while those with delayed bone ages hit their growth spurt later than normal. Kids who are below average height do not necessarily have a delayed bone age; in fact their bone age could actually be advanced which if left untreated, will stunt their growth.”

Bone age is determined by comparing hand x-rays against an atlas of bone x-rays.

The Tanner-Whitehouse Test (TW3) has a 96% success rate in males and 98% in females. The classification process was tested with 50 left-hand wrist images. Details can be found in the research paper  Estimation of Skeletal Maturity by Tanner and Whitehouse Method by V.Karthikeyan, V.J.Vijayalakshmi and P.Jeyakumar.

The esteemed judges said:

“Chronological of birth through public documents cannot provide absolute right for selection in a sports activity, when the petitioner completely knew about the medical test laid down by the BCCI in regards to selection process for which he had signed up.”

(FIFA introduced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans for the Under-17 World Cup in 2009. MRI scans are believed to be 99% accurate for 17 years and below.)

Chhabria did not challenge the methods of the test or the experts employed by the BCCI to make the correct deduction.

The cricketer was opposed to an ‘excessive’ policy which also meant that the BCCI enjoyed a monopoly while determining whether Chhabria should be allowed to participate in sports tournaments or not.

The BCCI defended itself claiming that the test was in use across different states and was not particular to the Mumbai Cricket Association. Moreover, the test had an in-built corrective mechanism wherein a third expert could be called in to if the first two experts differed in their opinion.

The judges added that the challenge could only be entertained if there was no prior rule or policy.

“However once participation is dependent on policy, then parties like the petitioner cannot bypass the same or call upon the court to do so.”

Sagar Chhabria is a Bandra resident. The petition was filed through his father.

The BCCI’s advocates said that Chhabria was , however, eligible to take part in Under-19 tournaments.

The BCCI does not employ the TW3 test at the Under-19 level.

According to an article in the Mumbai Mirror, “the so-called ‘fool-proof testing’ has not apparently worked well at the under-19 stage.”

The BCCI had over 2000 litigations from Under-19 players with regards to age testing using the said method.

A BCCI official said:

“The protocol for the under 19 players is valid certification — valid school leaving and birth certificates. The point is testing at under 19 level is a futile exercise and the accuracy of the results are questioned by the players who are resorting to legal recourse, if found overaged.”

The testing was undertaken at both levels following a directive from the ministry of sports.

The official added:

“The ministry of sports has sent us a directive to verify height, weight, dental age, physical and physiological state of the players and do X-rays and MRI scans. It would cost a lot and there is no guarantee over its accuracy, particularly at under 19 level. The board wants U-16 to be the entry point but the point is if someone flunks age-test at the under 16 level, one can always make himself available three years later at under 19 level with fake birth certificates.”

Innovative BCCI may ‘reverse auction’ interim IPL franchises: Not yet sold

Chennai Super Kings (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The BCCI can be creative.

They’re also very intent on playing it safe.

For some reason, they do not intend to let Chennai Super Kings (CSK) and Rajasthan Royals (RR) suffer when they return from their suspension in 2018.

The country’s premier cricketing body have decided to float two fresh teams in the Indian Premier League (IPL) but only for two years.

The new franchises will not find it easy to be profitable within those two years. It is definitely not a sustainable proposition for them.

Hence the BCCI, in all its wisdom, have decided that ‘Reverse Bidding’  is a distinct possibility that could be offered to its new suitors.

Panoramic View of the Stadium during IPL 2008 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A senior BCCI office-bearer said:

“If there is lack of interest in conventional bidding because of this two-year span, there is a possibility of reverse bidding that can happen where in an investor, who bids the lowest amount will be owner of a team. For example, if BCCI plans to pump in Rs. 70 crore, it might be the potential investor can buy bidding at Rs. 50 crore, Rs. 40 crore or Rs. 30 crore depending on the lowest.”

Players from the suspended franchises would be made available in the auction pool.

Rajasthan Royals (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The BCCI is keeping its cards close to its chest.

When queried whether there would be a 10-team league from 2018, the official replied:

“Look, our contracts with all the sponsors and the official broadcasters ends after the 2017 edition. Post that, we will start with a clean slate and all players would go back to auction.”

Investopedia defines a ‘Reverse Auction’  thus:

“A type of auction in which sellers bid for the prices at which they are willing to sell their goods and services. In a regular auction, a seller puts up an item and buyers place bids until the close of the auction, at which time the item goes to the highest bidder. In a reverse auction, the buyer puts up a request for a required good or service. Sellers then place bids for the amount they are willing to be paid for the good or service, and at the end of the auction the seller with the lowest amount wins.

Reverse auctions gained popularity with the emergence of Internet-based online auction tools. Today, reverse auctions are used by large corporations to purchase raw materials, supplies and services like accounting and customer service.
It is important to note that reverse auction does not work for every good or service. Goods and services that can be provided by only a few sellers cannot be acquired by reverse auction. In other words, reverse auction works only when there are many sellers who offer similar goods and services.”

The BCCI does not believe that its two year revenue model is sufficiently attractive to any prospective parties.

The reverse auction indicates that the BCCI is willing to subsidise some of the costs that will be incurred by the franchises; the auction is an attempt to minimise the BCCI’s losses.

This is not substantially different from one of the suggestions floated earlier that the BCCI manage the suspended franchises for the said period. The difference here is that two new teams will be floated but they will be allowed to choose any other cities not allocated to the other six sides including Chennai and Jaipur.

This is probably a response to the newly drafted conflict of interest rules to be tabled at the AGM.

The interim solution allows CSK and RR to pick up the core of their current set of players when they return to the IPL fold in 2018.

(N Srinivasan, the BCCI gods still shine bright for you.)

A base price will be set for potential buyers of the interim franchises.

K Shriniwas Rao explains:

“If the BCCI, for example, sets the base price of the franchise at Rs 100, bidders will be allowed to quote an amount lesser than Rs 100. The lowest bidder will be given the franchise. BCCI will pay the winning party the bid amount that will partly cover for the franchise’s operational costs heading into the tournament.

The bidder can also quote a figure running into negative. For instance, if the bidder quotes a figure of Rs -10 or Rs -5, he she will have to pay that (negative) amount to BCCI. The board expects potential bidders to like this idea if they have a specific two-year marketing or branding initiative in mind for which they won’t mind spending from their pockets.

The interim franchises will not receive a share of the central revenue pool unlike the other six existing teams but will be eligible for a substantial amount in terms of prize money (for players) and additional performance-based incentives from the central revenue pool if they make it to the top-four in the tournament.

In turn, these interim franchises can earn from local revenue pools – ­ gate money, sponsorships, merchandising and hospitality management ­ – to further cover their operational costs. The 50-odd players from CSK and RR, who’ll be up for sale at the auction, will first be part of a draft for the new franchises to retain. The number of players that could be allowed for retention through draft hasn’t been finalised yet. After the draft, once all franchises are on a level playing field, an auction will take place for the remaining players.”

As highlighted above, negative bidding is a possibility but unlikely. IPL teams have struggled to be in the black right from the start until now and it’s improbable that any franchise can turn a profit in just under two years.

Reverse auctions have been used in India before notably while awarding Coal India’s captive coal blocks to power producers.

These type of auctions are also preferred by corporate purchasing managers using them to procure paper clips to employee health care plans.

Procurement professionals love them; suppliers hate them.

Max Chafkin writes:

“Despite the fact that bids are generally ranked by price, reverse auctions are not binding for the buyer. Companies will sometimes go with the second- or third-lowest bid based on qualitative factors such as reliability, customer service, and the cost of switching away from an incumbent supplier.”

He adds:

“If, for instance, you know you’re bidding against a low-margin supplier with a history of quality problems, you may chose to aim for second place because the purchaser is apt to shy away from your opponent. If you’re bidding against a supplier that already has the account, assume that you’ll have to beat the supplier substantially on price to offset the cost to the customer of switching vendors.”

What this implies is that should the BCCI opt for this model, it is not bound to choose the least two costly bids. Other factors such as business plan,revenue model, finances, and reputation in the market would also have to be considered.

The die is set. May the blacker ink win.

Why isn’t recusal good enough for Roger Binny’s conflict of interest?

Is Shashank Manohar going too far with his conflict of interest reforms?

South Zone selector Roger Binny is under the hammer.

The proposed 29-point-agenda foresees serving notice to selectors who have financial or business interests with players.

Stuart Binny, Roger’s son, is currently a contender for the ODI and Test sides.

He enjoys the support of Mahendra Singh Dhoni and Virat Kohli.

Binny Sr. has always recused himself from committee deliberations whenever his son’s case came up.

A senior BCCI official, speaking to Times of India, said:

“I believe he should step down from his post. His work as national selector has been impeccable but with Stuart part of the Indian team, the ‘conflict of interest’ issue might come up in different quarters.

The board is planning to implement the points suggested by Manohar into its constitution and if and when it is done, Roger’s position may directly be in conflict.The rest of the selectors still have one more year on their term and may be asked to continue.”

The precedent cited is that of Manohar’s son Adwait stepping down from his positions in the BCCI soon after his dad took over the board to avoid any conflict of interest.

BCCI treasurer Anirudh Chaudhary said:

“The points made by the president are only suggestions at the moment, which will come up for discussion at the AGM. If the consensus in the board is on incorporating some of these points into the constitution, it’ll be done.

However, regarding conflict of interest over Roger, we are not part of the selection meetings and don’t know if Roger is present when his son’s name comes up for discussion. So it’s very difficult to prove a conflict in this case.”

The said requirements are way too stringent.

What the BCCI seems to imply is that an ex-cricketer can be a selector as long as his relatives are not competing for a spot in any of the sides the national selectors oversee.

Once his relatives are serious challengers, out goes the selector!

The practice of recusal is well-known and is often used to address a perceived conflict of interest.

To provide an analogy:

A university professor whose son or daughter were students in his or her class would not be stopped from teaching their class.

He or she would however not be allowed to set examination papers or mark results of the entire class.

The above is an example of recusal at its simplest.

It is the principle that ought to be applied to conflict of interest issues with national selectors when the reasons why they are in contravention are filial.

Conflict of interest issues, such as above, could be handled on a case-by-case basis.

The rules follow the principles and not vice-versa.

Shashank Manohar is inclined towards a stricter interpretation of the law. Even a perceived conflict of interest is to be summarily dealt with.

An India player is worth much more on the IPL auction block than a junior or Ranji cricketer.

Follow this thread of thought and you’ll understand the reasoning behind the latest BCCI thrust.

The law can be an ass sometimes and a stricter law a bigger ass.

Are the proposed diktats practical given the current dispensation where administrators and ex-cricketers have their fingers in more than one pie?

Can the BCCI attract enough ex-sportspersons to keep its machinery going?

Its pockets are deep enough.

Vandana Jain complains, withdraws case against Amit Mishra and then doesn’t (Updated)

Amit Mishra in the field during India’s first match of their 2011 tour of England at the County Ground, Taunton (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The best leg-spinner in the country, Amit Mishra, is embroiled in a sordid scandal.

A woman friend has filed and withdrawn a police complaint against the cricketer for allegedly assaulting her in his hotel room during the preparatory camp in Bengaluru last month.

Mishra had been summoned by the local authorities.

The leggie was originally booked under sections 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) and 328 (causing hurt with intent to commit an offence) of the Indian Penal Code.

The complainant is 34-year old Bengaluru resident Vandana Jain.  She is a Bollywood producer and co-owner of Celebrity Cricket League’s Bengal Tigers team along with Boney Kapoor.

Jain accused Mishra of attacking her with a kettle and behaving immodestly with her.

Mishra and Jain were good friends over the past three years. The diminutive sportsman was  a frequent visitor at her residence on Rest House, Crescent Road.

The lady confronted Mishra for avoiding her by inveigling herself into his hotel room without his permission.

According  to the Bangalore Mirror, Jain’s written complaint at the Ashok Nagar station states:

“I learnt that he is in town for training prior to South Africa tour. On September 25 evening, I went to Ritz Carlton hotel room and began to talk to him. He began to give me evasive replies and shouted at me. He tried to outrage my modesty. Even few hotel staff have seen this and CCTV footage must confirm this. Please take action against him for assaulting me.

Once he entered the room, he started fighting and asked me how I got into the room without his permission. He started hitting me with his hands and threw a kettle at my face. He started choking me hard and I suffocated. I screamed. I was frightened as I almost stopped breathing. He twisted my right wrist and fractured my right ring finger.”

A copy of the complaint was made available to the BCCI.

A senior police office said:

“We have sent a notice to him (Amit Mishra) and are waiting for his reply. Also, we have asked him to appear before the jurisdictional police at the earliest and also to co-operate with them in the investigation process.

We are collecting the information from the staff at the hotel on Residency Road, where the incident took place. It seems like the victim is known to Mishra and has visited him a couple of times. To get an exact picture we will question Mishra and the victim and then carry on with the case.”

Another police officer added:

“She told the staff in the reception lobby that Mishra was expecting her. Once upstairs, she told the housekeeping staff that she had lost her key and needed to use the washroom urgently. She looked confident and her posh dressing and mannerisms convinced the housekeeping staff.

There’s no doubt that the two knew each other very well. The woman has told us that they were in a relationship. She was forced to take the step of sneaking into his room as he was trying to avoid her. These things are common among couples and her entering the room cannot be construed as trespassing in the strict sense.

She was a familiar presence in the hotel. So the version of the hotel staff also can’t be taken on face value.”

Mishra is an integral part of Team India’s scheme of things for the on-going series against South Africa at home.

The trundler is considered unfortunate to have played just 15 Tests for the country since his debut in 2008.

In a turn of events, Vandana Jain has decided to withdraw her case.

Speaking to PTI, she said:

“Two days after lodging the complaint, I approached the police station and told them that I have in principle decided to withdraw the case,” the complainant told PTI here. I am waiting for Mishra to appear in the police station. We both will amicably withdraw the case. We were friends. We fought, and continue to remain friends here after.”

Jain insists that she has not been pressurized in any way.

She added:

“There was no pressure from any quarters, including the BCCI. I am surprised how the media picked up the case, which I have decided to withdraw.”

Update:

Jain has since recanted saying that she will not withdraw her complaint against Mishra.

Speaking to the Hindu, she said:

“I won’t withdraw the complaint against Amit (Mishra). I am hurt physically, mentally and emotionally by the cricketer. He knew I was going to the police and kept saying he will come to Bengaluru and sort out the matter. I want Amit to come in front of the police and talk to me.”

She added:

“My hand was in a cast, which I removed recently. I was forced to go to the police following the abuse and insult Amit subjected me to.”

Jain trusts that the law will take its course.

“Court and police will decide. I trust police, I trust law, so let them decide. I thought of withdrawing the case but then I realized if he is not worried about it then why I should. Let him take his step, let me take my step. I didn’t want to ruin his life, I don’t want to ruin his career but the things went wrong without my intentions.”

Second update:

Mishra was arrested on the 27th of October in the morning and then released on bail by the Ashok Nagar police.

The ace legspinner spent three hours at the Cubbon Park police station.

Sandeep Patil, DCP Central said:

“Enquiry with regard to the assault complaint was done. Mishra was questioned for 3 hours from 11am following which he was arrested and released on bail as it is a bailable offence.”

The Twitteratti reacted swiftly to the latest debacle.

Here are some choice tweets:

https://twitter.com/lindsaypereira/status/658936373131407360

Indo-Pak cricketing ties derailed by opportunistic politics and unrealistic expectations

It’s a crying shame, really.

Shahryar Khan, former Pakistan Foreign secretary. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Shashank Manohar may have begun ‘Operation Clean-Up’ on the right foot but the even-handed BCCI President couldn’t prevent Shiv Sena activists from barging into his headquarters in Mumbai and disrupting the scheduled bilateral series talks with Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) counterpart Shahryar Khan.

Boria Majumdar puts it aptly in his column:

“In India we celebrate cultural tolerance and plurality, we are forever ready to uphold freedom of expression and speech and most importantly are always open to dialogue. What happened in Mumbai goes against the very grain of what we stand for and that’s what has left us all with a sour aftertaste. Had Shashank Manohar been able to tell Shahryar Khan that the series is off because the situation is not conducive or the government has not given bilateral cricket a go ahead, it would have been far better for both cricket Boards. But to see a meeting stymied by a few political extremists who barged into the office of the BCCI president, which was left unguarded and to see these pictures being transmitted round the world is rather disconcerting.”

Shiv Sena (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The shame is not that a bilateral series between the two countries has once again been pushed onto the back-burner.

To be realistic, if the two boards were really intent on continuing relations, they could have easily opted to play in Abu Dhabi (as other cricketing nations have been doing) thus avoiding security concerns and untoward elements in either country.

That is not the nub of the issue.

If you were to read the newspapers and media reactions to Pakistani writers, cricketers and artistes, you would believe that anti-Pakistan sentiments are at an all-time high.

Is that really so?

Isn’t it more likely that certain opportunistic parties have raised the bogeyman once more to gain political mileage and divert attention of the general public from more pressing concerns about governance or rather the lack of it?

The more closely you look at the matter, the more apparent it becomes that having any sort of ties with the ‘enemy’ across the North-West border is a political decision. The mandarins in New Delhi have the final say.

Perhaps, realpolitik dictates otherwise.

For actual progress to occur, a nod must begin from the Prime Minister’s office and then only can the nation rest assured that change is in the air.

A bottom-up push is not the way to build bridges across a diplomatic divide.

That would be a revolution.

Shashank Manohar presides over cleaning up of BCCI’s IPL

Embed from Getty Images
Newly elected BCCI President Shashank Manohar hit his straps and struck the right notes at its Working Committee meeting last Sunday.

The decisions that the general public evinced most interest in were the ones pertaining to who would replace Pepsi as the title sponsor, whether the Chennai Super Kings and Rajasthan Royal franchises would be terminated or suspended and what would be the particulars of the newly framed conflict of interest rules within the cricketing body.

The Board did not disappoint.

Pepsi logo (1970-1991) In 1987, the font was modified slightly to a more rounded version which was used until 1991. This logo is now used for Pepsi Throwback (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Pepsi are expectedly out.

Surprise, surprise, it’s not Paytm replacing them but Vivo mobiles. That’s pulling a rabbit out of a hat.

Fair enough, given that Vivo agreed to the deal at the same price that Pepsi signed on.

Paytm would have been hard-pressed to match that.

The BCCI, after all its fulminations and discussions with the franchises’ owners, submitted to Justice Lodha committee’s dictates suspending the CSK and RR franchises for two years. The show must go on though—with eight teams.

Tenders will be floated and bids invited for two fresh franchises—once more making it a 10 team league in 2018.

Good enough.

It is the proposed conflict of interest rules that have raised a hue and cry within the BCCI and the state associations.

Shashank Manohar has taken a leaf out of his judicial textbook and drafted a stringent set of stipulations for administrators, selectors, commentators and players.

You could swear you heard a collective groan within the cosy cricketing fraternity.

To the highest bidder goes the spoils.

And you can rest assured that ex-cricketers will be scrambling to join the IPL band-wagon where the highest paymasters reside.

The guidelines will be tabled at the Annual General Meeting on Monday, 9th November 2015 at the BCCI Headquarters in Mumbai.

Manohar certainly means business when it comes to cleaning up the IPL mess.

No further comment.

Sponsors hit back at FIFA and BCCI: Image is everything

Joseph Blatter (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Sponsors have hit back and with a vengeance.

First, it was their demand for probity in FIFA affairs with Coca Cola, McDonalds, Visa and Budweiser seeking Joseph Blatter’s ouster.

Blatter responded with his characteristic bluster failing to acknowledge the winds of change.

His own Ethics Committee reacted less than a week later suspending him and his lieutenant Michel Platini for 90 days.

In India, Pepsi India served notice to the BCCI over its inept handling of the spot-fixing and betting scandals threatening to pull out of the title sponsorship.

The newly elected BCCI working committee has its hands full when it meets on October 18 to discuss the issue.

Blatter’s troubles originate with the Ethics Committee’s investigation into allegations of under-the-table payments to its former marketing partner International Sports and Leisure (ISL) in 2013.

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Blatter’s mentor and godfather João Havelange resigned as honorary President. Blatter was given a clean chit.

Matters came to a head this year when the Federal Bureau of Investigation(FBI) and the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation Division (IRS-CI) arrested seven FIFA officials and indicted 14 on charges of racketeering, wire fraud and money laundering.

Since FIFA employees are not government officials, the US government cannot charge them for bribery. Federal laws prevent them from doing so.

Blatter resigned four days after his re-election for an unprecedented fifth time.

Blatter was first elected president in 1998.

The arrests triggered separate inquiries in Australia, Colombia, Costa Rica and Switzerland.

Part of the Swiss investigation involved a ‘disloyal payment’ of two million Swiss francs to Michel Platini by Blatter for work performed between 1999 and 2002.

The Swiss head was also alleged to have signed off television rights for the 2010 and 2014 World Cups to a former FIFA official Jack Warner at below market rates.

Criminal proceedings began last week against the FIFA president.

The Ethics Committee moved swiftly suspending him and Platini  for 90 days. They further banned Ex-FIFA vice president Chung Mong-joon for six years.

While Coca-Cola, Anheuser-Busch InBev, McDonald’s and Visa were united in their opposition to Blatter’s continuance, Adidas refused to join  them.

The German sporting giant that has manufactured the World Cup match ball since 1970 and has been licensed to do till 2030 has the most to lose.

Soccer is the only sport in which it has a lead over its competitors. It is a Catch-22 situation.

It could either back the other advertisers and lose its most important market or suffer an erosion of its market share given the bad publicity surrounding FIFA and its running.

Blatter is believed to be an Adidas stooge.

Aidan Radnedge writes:

“Adidas supremo Horst Dassler plucked Blatter from the marketing department of luxury Swiss watchmaker Longines, trained him up for several months in Landersheim offices then installed him on the first – if lofty – rung of the Fifa ladder.

‘He taught me the finer points of sports politics – an excellent education for me,’ Blatter later said of Dassler, who also provided useful instruction in how to best enjoy a good cigar.”

It was Dassler and Havelange who  plotted the ouster of Sir Stanley Rous as Fifa president in 1974.

It was they who recognised the power vested in the federations of Asia and Africa. The poorer bodies felt alienated and under-represented. Havelange exploited their fears thus paving the way to become the most powerful man in soccer. He was ably assisted by his then right-hand man—Joseph Blatter.

ISL was founded in 1982 by Adidas heir Horst Dassler. For nearly two decades, it enjoyed a virtual monopoly of the commercial interests of both the world football federation and the Olympic movement.

ISL went bankrupt in 2001.

It is believed that without the pressure from Coca Cola and the others, the Ethics Committee would have proceeded more judiciously giving the accused a first hearing before issuing penalties.

FIFA expert professor Alan Tomlinson from the University of Brighton said:

“The sponsors have certainly ratcheted things up, and this is one of the main reasons why the ethics committee has, for once, acted quite swiftly. The normal procedure is for the accused to be initially heard and then, perhaps, issued with a provisional suspension, pending a full inquiry.

The sponsors have told FIFA that they have had enough and this has had a huge impact on recent events. This whole thing has come down to money because that is the one thing that people within FIFA understand.”

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A quarter of FIFA’s revenues over a 4-year-World-Cup cycle comes via sponsorship deals.

In India, PepsiCo, the soft drinks giant, are considering exiting the title spot citing concerns about the image of the IPL given the spot-fixing and betting imbroglios and suspension of franchises Chennai SuperKings and Rajasthan Royals.

PepsiCo India signed a deal for Rs.396 crores in 2012 for a five-year period.

If Pepsi pull out, then not just BCCI but also the franchises that have sold it ‘pouring rights’ will be adversely affected.

The ‘pouring rights’ are worth Rs.2 crores per season.

A co-owner of a franchise said:

“If the news about them pulling out of the IPL sponsorship is true, it’s a big loss. In these times when the brand value of the IPL is down so much, it will be difficult to sell the ‘pouring rights’ for more than Rs 50 lakh.

The tobacco and liquor companies were the ones to spend big money in sponsorship deals in cricket, then the cola giants became the big sponsors. In between, there were a few to associate with cricket like DLF and Hero Honda, but they pulled out too. If the cola companies pull out, it’s not good for the sport.”

The teams’ revenues too will be hit. The central revenue pool which is shared at 60:40 between the teams and the BCCI is the other main source of income besides team sponsorships. Any reduction in title sponsorship will lessen this intake.

The BCCI sought to play down the crisis.

An anonymous source within the BCCI and IPL said:

“Firstly, it has nothing to do with the 2013 IPL spot fixing scandal. At the moment, they’re concerned about the future of the IPL – whether it’ll be a 6, 8, 10 or 12-team tournament. Secondly, they’re not satisfied with the publicity that they’re getting out of the event vis-a-vis the other sponsors. They’ve to pay us Rs 90-100 crores every year, which isn’t a small amount.

It’s a sham. They have sponsored two IPL editions since the scandal broke out. I think they’re facing financial difficulties of their own. When we met them in Delhi some time back, they never gave an indication about this. In fact, we had a healthy discussion with their chairman and CEO for India region, D Shivakumar, about our future plans.”

The stern action and harsh words employed by commercial interests in the sporting properties of FIFA and the BCCI are reminiscent of tactics employed by activist investors in corporate governance.

Activist shareholders secure equity stakes in corporations to put public pressure on their management.

Their goals may be financial or non-financial.

Despite having a relatively small stake–sometimes just 1% is enough—, these activist investors seek the support of financial institutions who hold larger stakes to further their goals.  Some of them even manage to secure seats on the board.

While sponsors cannot be said to own equity stakes in sporting federations, given the huge contribution they make to their revenues, their influence cannot be discounted.

The IPL, in the wake of Lalit Modi’s ouster, installed a Governing Council to overlook its operations. Would it be a far-fetched idea to have a sponsor representative on the council that could safeguard their interests?

Corporate governance for sports federations that include the interests of sponsors would be more than practical.

For once, interests of fans and sponsors are aligned. Will it always be so?

Sourav Ganguly succeeds Jagmohan Dalmiya: The King is dead, long live the King!

The King is dead, long live the King!

It is, perhaps, fitting that Sourav Ganguly, Jagmohan Dalmiya’s erstwhile blue-eyed boy, succeeds him as president of the Cricket Association of Bengal (CAB).

The deal was sealed when the chief minister, Mamata Banerjee, threw her weight behind Ganguly’s candidature on Wednesday.

Ganguly was only recently elected to the CAB serving as a joint-secretary.

With Didi playing kingmaker, Dada has been fast-forwarded to the corridors of power within the BCCI.

Ganguly had always enjoyed a special relationship with ‘Jaggu’—as Dalmiya was fondly known.

Sourav Ganguly at the opening of the mascot of Knight Riders (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The southpaw ‘Maharajah’ was recalled to the Indian side in 1996 allegedly at Dalmiya’s behest.

It is also believed that Ganguly managed to hold on to his post as skipper through all the early turmoil because he enjoyed his benefactor’s support much as N Srinivasan is believed to be MS Dhoni’s champion.

It was also during Ganguly’s tenure as skipper that the BCCI under Dalmiya introduced centralised annual contracts for Indian cricketers.

Ganguly’s exit as skipper coincided with Dalmiya’s departure from the echelons of power.

The elegant former all-rounder is 43—still a relatively young man for the job.

It was six years ago that the former India skipper made known his ambitions of becoming the BCCI chief by 2014.

Speaking to Times of India then, the left-hander said:

“I am convinced that I can play a positive role. Having played the game at the highest level and being part of the system, I know what it takes to make a difference. At some point, I will find a way to get into the CAB where people have known me since I was a kid. I have respect for them and I am sure they will appreciate my concern for Bengal cricket and the difference I can make. I am in no hurry.”

It’s been six years but Ganguly has already taken a giant leap towards fulfilling his new dream.

It’s not that Ganguly is a total novice at this game of musical chairs.

His father, Chandidas, was a member of the CAB serving as assistant secretary, treasurer, secretary, vice-president and member of trustee board.

In turn, Ganguly has a chance to play kingmaker at the BCCI elections when they meet to elect the new president. It will be interesting to see how he plays his cards.

Ganguly is loyal to a fault. Dalmiya’s scion Avishek replaces his deceased father in the CAB as the joint secretary.

Trinamool Congress chief Mamata Banerjee attends a news conference in the eastern Indian city of Kolkata September 7, 2008. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Mamata Banerjee denied that it is at her interference that Bengal’s favourite son ascended to the throne.

She said:

“We are going through a big crisis after his (Dalmiya) unfortunate death. Someone has to head CAB. Dalmiya loved cricket so much. So it’s important that the people closed to him (should run the show)… cricket family is most important. My only request to all of you that be together, remain united and take the Jaguda’s legacy forward. It’s not fair for me to interfere. I just want them to do well, I’m there with them like a deputy or colleague. It’s what they have decided together.I should not be announcing this but since all of them are requesting I feel that as someone (Sourav Ganguly) who had led India so many years should now take charge of the role and they should form the set up with Abhishek, Subir, Biswarup and all other senior members.”

She added:

“Please don’t involve the state government here. I am nobody. It’s what they decided. Please don’t bring any controversy here. It’s their decision as they all are cricket lovers. After Jaguda’s death, CAB is without a head now and they have decided that Sourav will become the president and in his place Avishek will become the joint secretary till the next elections in July.”

Ganguly said:

“Anything in life is a new challenge. I am particularly happy that Avishek is coming into administration as it is a very emotional time for him. Myself, Biswarup, Subir would all work together and there won’t be any problems. We have 117 (actually 121) members and we will decide the way forward. Like she said, it is not her decision. She had spoken to the members. For me this is not everything. I will do whatever I can, whatever they want me to do. Will take over immediately as we have a game on October 8. These are big shoes to fill.”

Former India cricketer and Ganguly’s teammate VVS Laxman welcomed his elevation to the post.

He said:

“It’s Sourav who brought me here and I’m seeing him as an administrator for last one year. He’s trying his best to take Bengal cricket forward. It’s a great selection and a positive sign for the Indian cricket.”

Laxman is the batting consultant with the state’s Ranji side.

Ajay Jadeja was more circumspect in his reaction.

He said:

“Ganguly has been a good leader but administration is a different ball game. At the same time, being a former cricketer, it is beneficial for him. Have faith in him. Wait and watch. It is his new innings and I wish him the best.”

Ganguly, however, will not have everything going his way.

He has already ruffled feathers within the CAB by seeking the chief minster’s blessings sidestepping the democratic process. The Prince of Calcutta was probably well aware that he might not be able to command the majority required.

Derek Abraham, writing for the DNA, commented:

“Two years ago, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) had accused the Union sports ministry of trying to ‘assume control’ of sports federations by bringing in the National Sports Code. Soon Ajay Maken, the sports minister, was shunted out by all those politicians controlling various federations, including the BCCI.

However, when Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee threw her weight behind former India captain Sourav Ganguly on Wednesday, virtually anointing him president of the Cricket Association of Bengal, none of the so-called custodians of the BCCI’s autonomy came forward to slam the move.”

He adds:

“The CAB is an institution dating back to 1928. Ganguly has, quite shockingly, made a mockery of the institutional process that ought to have been followed. By using his good offices with the most powerful person in the state, India’s second-most successful skipper has subjected himself to scrutiny both within and outside the cricket fraternity.

A joint secretary serving his first term, Ganguly has bypassed many veteran administrators who have been serving the association for decades. Worse, he got Avishek Dalmiya, the deceased president’s son, to become the joint secretary. For the record, Avishek never been a part of a sub-committee of the CAB. If Ganguly is a novice in cricket administration, then Avishek is a fledgling.

To quote a CAB insider, the ‘new president’ has done exactly what his predecessor never wanted — play into the hands of the government of the day. ‘He has disappointed us all by sidestepping the democratic process of the CAB. But there is nothing we can do because he has Madam’s support.’”

Boria Majumdar, blogging for the Economic Times, raises similar points in his post.

He is , however, optimistic that Ganguly may just be the ‘breath of fresh air’ the Board needs.

He writes:

“The BCCI needs men of credibility and integrity after what it has gone through the last few years. Ganguly should come as a breath of fresh air for the board’s mandarins. He is a face they can thrust forward as a diplomatic shield in many uncomfortable situations. His presence in the board’s special general meetings (SGMs) and annual general meetings (AGMs) should result in him making tangible contributions to improving Indian cricket both at home and abroad.

Can we add another feather to the many that he already wears? With Sourav Ganguly you just can’t tell.”

While the political patronage sought by Ganguly is to be deplored, why do members of the BCCI (and other sports bodies) not take issue when politicians such as Sharad Pawar and Arun Jaitley make the BCCI an extension of their political masters’ rivalry? We also have to ask ourselves that if it had not been Ganguly but some businessperson who sought the Trinamool Congress’ leader’s support, would there have been such a hue-and-cry? If the answer’s no, then why the hypocrisy?

It’s time that the national sports federations revisited the provisions of the Draft National Sports Development bill which they rejected and added clauses that would bolster their independence. Till then, the kind of politicking and ad-hoc decision-making process typical of Indian sports bodies will continue to be a feature of the national landscape.

IPL spot-fixing scandal: Sreesanth, Chandila and Chavan go scot-free, not quite…

With S Sreesanth, Ajit Chandila and Ankeet Chavan absolved of any  criminal complicity in the IPL spot-fixing and betting scandal and the BCCI drawing a line in the sand claiming that their ban on the aforesaid individuals will not be revoked, Indian cricket fans are in for more courtroom drama involving the BCCI and the freed trio.

Sreesanth at Adelaide Oval (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Delhi court order leaves the field open for the three players to challenge the nation’s premier cricket body and overturn the ban. This may be a long drawn-out process. There is no guarantee that if and when the ban is nullified, the players will be at their best. They have lost their prime years while serving the ban.

Mohammad Azharuddin, Nayan Mongia and Ajay Jadeja cleared  their names by taking on the BCCI via the Indian judicial system. Yet, only Jadeja was able to make a comeback of sorts to competitive cricket.

What must perplex every cricket aficionado is how and why one tribunal found the IPL players guilty and the other did not. The evidence presented in both cases was the same. Strange are the ways of the Indian judicial system and the BCCI.

The BCCI responded to the Delhi High Court’s verdict thus:

“Any disciplinary proceeding or decision taken by the BCCI is independent of any criminal proceeding and has no bearing. The decisions of the BCCI, based on its independent disciplinary action, shall remain unaltered.The BCCI has nothing to do with acriminal case between the police and individuals. The disciplinary proceedings of the board and the criminal case of the police are independent of each other. In certain cases a charge is enough in a departmental inquiry while the same charge is needed to be proved in a court of law.”

PR Raman, a former legal officer with the cricketing body, said:

“The standard of proof in a court is different from standard of proof in a BCCI inquiry. Acquittal in a court cannot have any influence on the BCCI action which was taken independent of court rules.The degree of strictness is different from a court and a domestic/departmental inquiry. The laws in courts are not similar to those in the BCCI. The BCCI goes by its own code of conduct.Savani had found out that they were hobnobbing with bookies. That is enough to prove the players guilty. Talking to bookies is unacceptable under the BCCI code.”

Mohammad Amir pulling on his jumper in the outfield. Taken during Pakistan’s third Test against England in August 2010. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Mohammad Amir, Mohammad Asif and Salman Butt were handed five, seven and ten years bans by an ICC tribunal. The criminal case that followed wherein the ICC verdict was not made available to the English press to prevent biasing any jury found the above guilty of conspiracy to cheat at gambling and accepting corrupt payments. Butt and Asif were sentenced to 30 and 12 months in prison respectively while Amir was sentenced to six months in Feltham Young Offenders Institution.

The teen-aged fast bowler was freed after serving only half his sentence.

The ICC tribunal and the Southwark Crown Court were one in accord.

The discordant note struck yesterday  will have warning bells going off within the BCCI once more.

Mohammad Azharuddin Sangeeta Bijlani (Photo credit: Wikipedia)