BCCI

IPL Governing Council buys time for all concerned, except the fans

Trust the BCCI (more specifically, the IPL Governing Council) to appoint a working group to look into the recommendations of the Lodha panel.

Franchises’ input into the process is ostensibly the reason touted by the council.

It is an excuse to buy more time. It does not come as a surprise; the BCCI is split into two warring factions, one for ICC chief N Srinivasan and the other against.

The BCCI has six additional weeks to arrive at a decision.

“The show must go on,” says IPL chairman Rajiv Shukla.

It’s evident that there will be another IPL next year with eight teams, not six.

There will be yet another auction, the players and support staff will be happy that they are not monetarily or otherwise affected, the Supreme Court verdict will be honored—if not in principle.

The question on everyone’s mind: What is N Srinivasan going to do?
Embed from Getty Images
His position as ICC chairman is even more untenable by the day.

Can he pull yet another rabbit out of his hat?

The governing council’s decision has given him time to ponder his limited options.

If the BCCI (and the ICC) is serious about clearing the mess that is the IPL, the India Cements strongman has to exit.

Whether the CSK and RR franchises are terminated is moot. The Supreme Court verdict is less harsh than what the rules dictate.

Teams have been terminated for less.

The BCCI has painted itself into an inglorious corner with its inability and unwillingness to clean up its Augean stables.

It waited for the Supreme Court to burn them down, instead.

Is it now delaying only for the Supreme Court commission to drive the final nail into its coffin when it completes its investigation into the allegations against IPL COO Sundar Raman?

That will be Judgment Day indeed.

BCCI and its IPL options: Fans’ choice

The Supreme Court appointed Lodha committee has pronounced its verdict on the IPL betting scandal.

Two teams, Chennai Super Kings (CSK) and Rajasthan Royals (RR), have been suspended for two years.

Their principals, Raj Kundra and Gurunath Meiyappan, have been handed out life-time bans from any cricketing activity.

Where does this leave the IPL, specifically IPL 9?

There exist three options that the BCCI can exercise:

1> Restrict the competition to six teams and re-negotiate contracts that expect eight teams to take part with their supporting sponsors. The reduced revenue to the BCCI should act as a punitive spur to promote transparency, integrity and probity in the running of the league. Given the current format, the number of matches would be reduced to 34. A simple tweaking of the rules and each team can play the other three times instead of two. This would increase the number of games to 49. Though substantially less than 60, this would ensure a much shorter, tighter IPL. The third game can be played at neutral venues, specifically at Chennai and Jaipur. After all, why should local cricket fans suffer for their franchises’ moral rectitude?

2>  Retain the suspended teams and either have the owners unload the franchises or have the BCCI take over the reins for the suspension period. Valuations  have plummeted and the said franchises can be had  at bargain prices by interested parties. The latter entails a conflict of interest but does the BCCI care? It never did when it had N Srinivasan at the helm.

Kochi Tuskers Kerala (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

3> The final solution would be to hold fresh auctions for one or two franchises. This depends. Can Kochi Tuskers and the BCCI arriving at an understanding about the Kerala team’s return to the IPL fold? The players of suspended teams would be made available to these ‘fresh‘ franchises. CSK and RR can return after serving out their sentence. The BCCI would then have 10 IPL ‘subsidiaries‘ as originally envisioned. The format can be jiggled once more to include two groups of five teams each, ensuring a total of 44 games in all.

These are, of course, the options available to the IPL governing committee.

What is  the best course of action?

The Indian cricket fan is disillusioned with the way the IPL is now governed. Yes, its glitz and glamour and  viewer-friendly format, sound and color have attracted fresh eyeballs to the game.

But is this truly a professionally run league?

Options 2 and 3 seem like ‘business-as-usual‘. “Yes, the Supreme Court has rapped us—the BCCI—yes, we are the cynosure of attention of the sporting world who are aghast that a league considered the forerunner of the mushrooming T20 leagues across the world with a model that was copied  and followed is brought to its knees by corruption charges once more.”

The above options, while not benefiting the BCCI to the extent it envisioned when it conceptualized the league, especially with depressed valuations, will seem to discerning fans that the administrative body does not really foresee the reforms needed to overhaul the existing system.

Yes, it takes sponsors, advertisers and televising partners’ interests into account but does it really serve the public, the people who support the game through thick and thin? What happens when this very demographic turns against their beloved cricketers?

Leagues for other sports such as kabaddi, soccer, hockey and tennis are vying for viewer attention. Can the BCCI afford to turn a blind eye to fans’ sentiments?

In my opinion, the best course of action is to play six teams. Let CSK and RR players sit out. The BCCI should force the owners to compensate them and pay out their dues for the rest of their contracts. The message is clear: “Keep your eyes and ears open for any hanky-panky in the league and inform the concerned authorities as soon as possible. Else you too (players) may have to bear the consequences.”

It also sends out a strong signal to the owners that the BCCI will not bail them out in any way either by playing caretaker or allowing them to dispose off their non-performing assets so easily. The BCCI is just one player—albeit the most important one—in this morass. The franchises owe their supporters accountability, transparency and honesty as well.

The IPL may well be a better and bigger place to work, play and be in after all the dust has settled. For now, the legal scrapping continues.

Supreme Court: What they said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Supreme justice for N Srinivasan.

What they said:

“Individuals are birds of passage while institutions are forever.”

The Supreme Court bench of Justices T S Thakur and F M I Kalifulla read N Srinivasan his rights in a ruling that effectively prevents him contesting for the BCCI top post.

The judges ruled out any person having a commercial interest in BCCI events from being a part of the governing body. Srinivasan has a controlling interest in Chennai Super Kings, an IPL team.

They said:

“The BCCI is a very important institution that discharges important public functions. Demands of institutional integrity are, therefore, heavy and need to be met suitably in larger public interest. Individuals are birds of passage while institutions are forever.

The expectations of the millions of cricket lovers in particular and public at large in general have lowered considerably the threshold of tolerance for any mischief, wrong doing or corrupt practices which ought to be weeded out of the system.” 

What they really meant:

“…birds of passage…..And your time is past, Mr. Srinivasan. You are not the BCCI and the BCCI is not you.”

What they definitely didn’t:

“Could we have a couple of freebies to the CSK games, Mr. Srinivasan, please?”

IS Bindra: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

IS Bindra

What he said:

“It’s such a frustrating scenario: One can’t become the chief minister, but one can still become the prime minister! “

IS Bindra, former president of the Punjab Cricket Association (PCA), is acerbic about the current farcical situation;  Narayanswamy Srinivasan is unable to preside over the BCCI pending a Supreme Court judgment yet  is chairman of the ICC.

The outspoken former BCCI chief recently stepped down as head of the PCA.

He said:

“I haven’t made it easier for Srini … In fact, I’m free to blog and tweet exactly what I want… My hands aren’t tied now…”

On his retirement:

“I’d reached a stage where I felt I couldn’t do anything for cricket in India…

Also, I didn’t want the PCA to suffer because of my strong views on Srini. Mohali should have got a Test against the West Indies, but didn’t. Yet, there are affiliates of the Board who keep getting international matches out of turn…

I’ve helped build the PCA and I’m passionate about it. I couldn’t have allowed it to be penalised because of my convictions. I’ve always respected the primacy of institutions…

Above all, there comes a time in everyone’s life when one has to gracefully retire and move on after having been at the helm of an institution. I couldn’t have been at the PCA forever.”

On Jagmohan Dalmiya:

“I’d expected Jaggu to join me in the fight to oust Srini, but he didn’t do so. It’s for him to explain why. I’m as disappointed with quite a few of the others in the Board who, too, have chosen to stay quiet.”

On Srinivasan’s chances of returning as Board president if the Supreme Court fails to bar him:

“If that’s so, then Srini will win. Who’ll oppose him? For one reason or the other, I don’t see any opposition. Not when the men with influence are silent. I’ve retired as an administrator, but my love for cricket remains undiminished. I’ll gun for whoever tries to harm the game in India. You can be assured.”

What he really meant:

“It’s like you can be President but you can’t be governor.  Or you can volunteer but you can’t work.”

What he definitely didn’t:

“Let’s play musical chairs with the Supreme Court, the Pied Piper.”

 

Follow my blog with Bloglovin

Googli Hoogli ruminates on BCCI’s ‘home tactics’

Sunil Gavaskar: BCCI announces CK Nayudu Lifetime achievement award

Baichung Bhutia: What he said, really meant and definitely did not

Baichung Bhutia Takes Time Off To Pen His Sporting Views

What he said:

“I’d have been tending to my little children and new club instead of writing this.”

Baichung Bhutia comes out in support of the proposed National Sports Federation bill seeking restricted tenures for administrative heads.

Bhutia’s views were published by the Hindustan Times, the second article in a continuing eight-part series dissembling the issues tackled by the Sports Bill.

Bhutia wrote:

Fifa, despite allegations of corruption, is run more efficiently than sport in India. That means you can’t compare us and them where them also includes the IOC and its tradition of long-serving presidents. The truth is, 64 years after Independence, sport in India is not on the right track. And proof of that lies in the underwhelming international performance of a nation of over 1 billion people.
My point, therefore, is this: the current system of administration has failed and that means there’s something definitely wrong with it. There’s no point saying Brazil’s football isn’t run properly — well, they still win five World Cups and are expected to win one every time it comes along. If we won as many gold as China in Olympics — and they started participating regularly only in 1984 — or even 20 less than them, I’d have been tending to my little children and new club instead of writing this.

The Ajay Maken (India’s sports minister) sponsored bill has been opposed by both the Board For Cricket Control in India (BCCI) and the Indian Olympic Association (IOA).

Bhutia added:

Why not restrict federation presidents to a maximum of 12-year terms and secretaries to eight? If you haven’t been able to make a difference in that time, chances are you never will.

And if you have been a game-changer, I am sure you will be asked to stay and contribute in some capacity even after your term’s over. Making tenures time-bound is also one way of increasing transparency and accountability because you can’t manipulate votes.

What he really meant:

“I care.”

What he definitely didn’t:

“I’m the retiring type, in every aspect.”

India Cricket: Rajeev Shukla Promotes English Cricket

What he said:

"England have been losing for the last 10 years, most of their teams, and at football also. So therefore we’re absolutely happy because we want cricket to grow in England."

New IPL Chairman, Rajeev Shukla, is a jolly good fellow.

Shukla’s horizons have broadened since ascending the BCCI ladder. The IPL chief believes that the recent victory over India at home will benefit English sport.

Shukla said:

“As far as the fans were concerned they were not very happy, but in games, defeat and victory go together, you lose and you win, that happens."

Ironically, Shukla is troubled about the deleterious effect of IPL on Test cricket:

The effect IPL is having on Test cricket is also our concern. That is why we are doing our level best to promote Test cricket now.

We are playing more Test matches, there will be a focus on the Tests. We need to promote all three forms of the game and we are not thinking only from the position of money. There may be more money in Twenty20, more money in one-day, but it does not mean that we should compromise with Test cricket.

We are thinking that we should organise more Test matches in B towns because in the populated metropolises people are always in a hurry, they’re busier, they want Twenty20, they want the one-dayer. But in B grade cities in India where they hardly get any international cricket but still have large populations, if a Test match is organised people will want to watch it.

What he really meant:

“We don’t mind losing on the field; we’re winning in the board room.”

What he definitely didn’t:

“I’m just learning the ropes; that’s the best positive spin I can put on an unmitigated disaster of a tour.”

Rajeev Shukla: What he said, really meant and definitely did not

Rajeev Shukla Is Not Fatigued For Excuses

What he said:

We have three formats. There are very few common players. There is no fatigue in common players.

To avoid fatigue, we said there should be proper coordination between physio and trainer. We will talk to the franchises to reduce the participation of players in parties that are held on the eve of matches.

So that the players get rest. But, if you say that there is fatigue due to IPL, I don’t agree with that.

IPL Chairman Rajeev Shukla refutes the ‘absurd’ notion that cricketers are tired because of the IPL. The ICC virtually cleared the Future Tours Programme (FTP) schedule to accommodate the IPL.

The BCCI was severely criticized following the abject surrender of the national side in the away series in England. The tourists lost 0-4—a complete whitewash.

The IPL was seen as the largest contributory factor for this defeat.

Injuries to key players on the tour only exacerbated the perception.

What he really meant:

“Cricketers are superheroes, robots or demi-Gods. Have it whichever way you like. Fatigue is for mere mortals.“

“Just wave a little IPL moolah and the word ‘fatigue’ disappears from the players’ dictionary.”

What he definitely didn’t:

“It’s a no-brainer. Let’s drop Tests altogether.”

N Srinivasan: What he said, really meant and definitely did not

N Srinivasan Is Taken For a Ride

What he said:

We were taken for a ride. I know we cannot plead before you that we did not know all this was happening. Your question would be, were you not vigilant? What did you do? I am sorry, sir, there is no defence for me. No defence in front of you. So, I am not pleading that at all. We just put our heads down.

N Srinivasan, BCCI Secretary and owner of Chennai Super Kings (CSK), claims that he and his colleagues were hoodwinked by ex-IPL commissioner Lalit Modi.

His remarks were made to Parliament’s Standing Committee on finance  when it was discovered that all cheques were signed by Srinivasan—then treasurer— and his successor, MP Pandove.

What he really meant:

“So what if I’m MD of India Cements. Lalit Modi outsmarted us. Believe us, we’re innocents.”

What he definitely didn’t:

“The IPL Governing Council was farcical.”