Have the BCCI become bigger than cricket?

N Srinivasan

It is not too novel to hear the word “Bully” attached to the Indian national cricket board i.e. the BCCI (Board Of Control For Cricket In India). Unfortunately, according to many, the Board lives up to this name as it often pulls the strings of the ICC as well as other international cricket boards. Be it the DRS or shortening the span of an overseas series involving India or even with regard to profits from broadcasting, it never fails to flex its muscles.

By doing so, though it may have established its authority and stature in world cricket but on the other hand, it has tended to remain oblivious to the passion of an average cricket fan.

Administration

The administration is filled to the brim with politicians. This is true not only of the BCCI but also many of the state boards. For instance- DDCA presided by Arun Jaitley of the BJP, GCA presided by Narendra Modi to name a few.

These politicians very well know the intricacies of the proper working of the cricketing system. They run it very well, be it the funds, the administration, the facilities to be provided to young players. But whenever a controversy crops up where the fans feel deceived and demand answers, these famed officials tend to go into their shells behaving like saints sitting atop the money and funds that the fans provide by taking time off their busy lives to go to the stadiums to watch the game that is considered religion in this country.

They turn deaf to the fans’ cries for answers. This was best exemplified in the IPL Spot-fixing Scandal of 2013 which brought to light the whole nexus of bookies and cricketers and administrators indulging in the shameful practice of spot-fixing and match-fixing.

Srinivasan, now re-elected as the President of the BCCI in his own words had demanded the removal of anyone who brought disrepute to the game. But when the skeletons tumbled out of his own closet and his name was among those topping the list of ‘those shaming the game’, the fame, the authority, the stature, the seat of power and most importantly the designation of ‘the President of the BCCI’ got the better of him. The post was probably difficult to let go and he tried all that he could to hold onto his dear post.

Though he left the post under immense media pressure, an interim chief was appointed and the BCCI also set up a committee which was termed in the end as a ‘sham’ by many. The Court ordered the setting up of another probe panel. Thus, this incident put the credibility of the Board itself in question.

In such situations, the administrators instead of acting as lovers and guardians of the game, act as politicians who are, very often rightly the object of public fury nowadays.

The question of revenues

Cricket is about the passion of the players, of the coaches of the groundsmen who work hard to prepare good pitches that produce great games. This is what the fans thrive for, but when this is marred by petty politics and profit wrestling between the board and the broadcasters, the only person who suffers is the average cricket fan.

BCCI seems to view itself as the central body in world cricket and has always claimed to be a “charitable” institution. On these grounds, even though it is the richest sporting body in the country, it refuses to pay taxes.

Also, it seems what the BCCI doesn’t recognize as an event doesn’t qualify as a cricket tournament. This adverse reaction to unrecognized tournaments was seen when young players started joining the ICL (Indian Cricket League). Instead of encouraging the youth and investing in the tournament, BCCI refused to associate with it. It also increased the prize money and also publicly criticised legends like Kapil Dev for joining the ICL and went to the extent of revoking his pension. Under pressure, Kapil Dev gave his resignation from ICL and hence made his way back to the BCCI fold.

Controversies with respect to broadcasting rights have also not stayed afar. In 2011, the Board scrapped its broadcasting contract and with Nimbus three years before its expiry and also tried to invoke Nimbus’ bank guarantees worth $300 million as the members of their committee saw the company as being a regular defaulter in terms of payments.

Due to this sudden termination, the entire domestic season during that time could not be televised. Also the break between cricket matches was not dedicated to cricket and instead commentators Sanjay Manjrekar and Courtney Walsh had to interview hockey players participating in World Series Hockey during that time to fill in the gap.

ICC vs BCCI

BCCI has always been at loggerheads with ICC. It has often indulged in arm-twisting the ICC into making decisions in BCCI’s favour especially with regard to ICC’s Future Tours Programme (FTP). The very recent example is shortening India’s tour of South Africa partly because of prior friction between the Board and Haroon Lorgat and also to accommodate Sachin’s last test in India rather than South Africa. This decision may or may not be Sachin’s but has surely proved most beneficial to the BCCI with them earning a lot from marketing Sachin’s last test series while CSA loses out on almost Rs.175 million.

This decision also meant that India meet West Indies and Pakistan meet South Africa for a short tour. Familiar teams meet again and again and the Indian test team mostly comprising of youngsters lose out on experience of playing in overseas conditions which they would have otherwise benefited from if the span of the series had not been shortened. Yet again, cricket suffers.

BCCI had also reportedly demanded a larger share of the 75% of the net profits that the ICC distributes to its full members.

A very well documented cause of friction between the ICC and the BCCI is regarding the adoption of UDRS (Umpire Decision Review System). The BCCI has publicly and consistently resisted its use. Though the DRS hasn’t quite been up to the mark but its use is undoubtedly more advantageous than detrimental.

BCCI has justified its stand by implying that the ball-tracking system and the HotSpot do not pass the test of perfection. But the absence of this technology also doesn’t eliminate the howlers as umpire’s decisions aren’t perfect either. Its use has proved beneficial and even match-winning for India. The overturning of Sachin’s leg-before decision in the semi-final against Pakistan was a key moment. His innings of 85 runs won us the match in the end. Even in the ongoing series between India and West Indies, Sachin and even Virat Kohli fell prey to poor umpiring which could have probably been avoided had the BCCI agreed to the use of DRS.

Although it is the richest board, BCCI also resists the use of DRS as it will involve costs to them. Boards such as Cricket Australia and ECB who are not as rich on the other hand promote its use.

Conclusion

The BCCI is undoubtedly at the pinnacle of success at the moment and is a force to be reckoned with in the international cricket circles of administration. Many other sports can learn a lot on how to market its sport and try and achieve what BCCI has.

Defining BCCI’s often involves words like “rich”, “money”, “power” and rarely words which define the players’ interests or the fans’. This is because in their bid to make Indian cricket the best in the world, the materialistic interests are being taken care of and the emotional aspects being ignored.

Therefore, doling out money and awards and taking care of the economic interests is important but at the same time the spirit, the passion of the fans and the players’ and games’ interest is what matters the most.

Therefore, instead of constantly bending rules to fit the interests of the administrators, BCCI should instead concentrate more on taking the interests of the players, the support staff and the players into account because at the end of the day these factors coalesce together to make this game what it is in India. It’s a religion that everyone follows and a game that unites billions.