DC DEBATE: Kirti Azad Vs Anirudh Chaudhry
BCCI is killing the goose (read cricket) that lays the golden eggs
====================================================
Kirti Azad - It’s a milch cow for politicians
Disciplinary committees in state associations and BCCI/IPL are a farce. If somebody complains, the issue is diverted to the disciplinary committee, whose job is solely to buy time and push it under the carpet.
The Board of Control for Cricket in India was set up by cricket lovers for a noble cause of promoting the game. Over the years, two politicians — N.K.P. Salve and Madhav Rao Scindia — lent their weight to making BCCI a really respected body. Seeing their successful stints, several other netas got the idea that BCCI was a milch cow and could be exploited to make money.
Soon, petty businessmen followed suit. They seized the local associations by manipulating the proxy system. After collecting the proxies, which is legal under the Companies Act, the businessmen teamed up with powerful politicians and did all the dirty work of keeping good members and cricketers at bay. Proxies ensured that the politicians would not lose control of state associations and BCCI, with remunerative assignments being apportioned amongst supporters.
Disciplinary committees in state associations and BCCI/IPL are just a farce. If somebody complains, the issue is diverted to the disciplinary committee, whose job is solely to buy time and push it under the carpet. Since the government could be managed by powerful politicians, the only threat was from the judiciary. So lawyers were hired to employ every trick in the trade to keep matters away from the gaze of the judiciary.
The situation changed once Aditya Verma took up his fight against the BCCI and filed a case. Despite the fielding of legal stalwarts, whose specialty is to play with legalese, the SC decided to take the case to its logical conclusion. And once the matter went to the SC, BCCI’s lies and deceit were exposed. N. Srinivasan and his bunch of merrymakers were confident that they were in control as several Union ministers, chief ministers and members of Parliament were literally prostrating before BCCI top bosses for important positions, seemingly free of charge.
The Supreme Court has shown keen interest in cleaning up Indian cricket and an order to back up their intentions could spell doom for Mr Srinivasan.
I have some questions for the BCCI.
Selecting players to represent India is a state function. Why should it be left to a body (which is not recognised by the Indian government and which itself does not recognise the government in any way) to select the Indian team? Secondly, if the Inter-national Cricket Council recognises BCCI as the national federation responsible for the game, the government, in the prevalent exceptional circumstances, can apply for recognition by floating a National Sports Federation for cricket.
The very fact that BCCI requires political approval from the external affairs ministry and security clearance from the home ministry means that the government can exercise control over BCCI. Is it not true that powerful political leaders do not allow any control over this uncontrolled body?
It is high time that money that needs to be spent on the game is not cornered by a few self-seeking lawyers, who are out to throw mud in everyone’s eyes, and line their pockets. BCCI, I am hopeful, will be run by honest administrators and former players so that the cricket lovers will once again have respect for the game — something that has been missing in the last few years.
Kirti Azad is a member of Parliament and was a member of India’s 1983 World Cup-winning team
===========================================================
Anirudh Chaudhry - BCCI has done a lot for cricket
Why do people not talk about BCCI being the only sports body that pays a pension to players who have played 25 or more first class games or to the widows of those deceased?
It came as a surprise when I was asked to express my views with respect to a thought that as the guardian of cricket, the BCCI has failed to live up to its responsibilities. Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to orchestrate public opinion against the he Board of Control for Cricket in India in the backdrop of a matter that was the subject of a probe coupled with an investigation under the orders of the Supreme Court of India. What is interesting is the fact that apart from the Justice Mudgal IPL Probe Committee and the investigating team (and now the Supreme Court), no one really knows the entire content of the report submitted to the Supreme Court.
Despite this, there was a regular flood of “authoritative” opinions and decisions and proposed future courses of action appearing in the media repeatedly before every date of hearing of the matter in the Supreme Court. A mention of a violation of the “Player Code of Conduct” was brazenly converted into a violation of the “Anti Corruption Code” to garner opinion against the BCCI. Further, this was projected as something that had happened during the IPL. All through this, the BCCI has remained silent and members have not expressed their views publicly while discussing their views threadbare at the appropriate internal forums to be communicated through its representative in the Supreme Court.
The silence of the members of the BCCI in the media is because individually we find it inappropriate to comment upon a subject that is at the epicentre of the matter being discussed for adjudication in the Supreme Court. I do not wish to comment further on this, not because I do not want to or do not have things to say, but because it would be inappropriate to do so.
I only wish that grudges against the BCCI were not the motivation for certain persons to obfuscate the issue and go after the BCCI in a Goebbelsian manner and at the very least expected, that propriety would be observed at least with due deference to the Supreme Court if not the society.
I do, however, want to mention what they don’t talk about. They don’t talk about BCCI being the only sports body that pays a pension to players who have played 25 or more first class games or to the widows of those deceased. They don’t talk about the benefit schemes for cricketers and their families that are being implemented by BCCI’s member associations. They don’t talk about the increasing number of tours being organised by the BCCI for junior cricketers to give them exposure. They don’t talk about the circumstances under which playing cricket has become a professionally viable option. They don’t talk about the increasing efficiency and number of systems that the BCCI is putting in place for more efficient administration of the game.
They don’t talk about how, as president, Mr N. Srinivasan could have advocated that a share of the profits from a bumper IPL season be shared with the franchisees, but he did instead propose that the amount be shared with all the former players who had graced the game when there was no money in cricket, in the form of a “One Time Benefit” scheme. One did not hear anyone say “conflict of interest” in favour of BCCI then.
Anirudh Chaudhry is treasurer, BCCI
