Former Indian skipper Kapil Dev and Sunil Gavaskar have joined the list of the popular Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) commentators who have challenged some of the recommendations put forward by the Lodha panel.
While Gavaskar said he believes BCCI has already got the structure for the state associations to follow in connection to their office bearers, Kapil said he could not agree with the recommendation which says that it will be a “one state, one vote" system.
Both Gavaskar and Kapil’s comments come just after former Indian skipper Ravi Shastri expressed his concerns over some of the recommendations a few days back. All of them are currently commentating in the ongoing series between India and New Zealand, and it was former India batsman and fellow commentator Sanjay Manjrekar who interviewed all three regarding the same.
Kapil, on the other hand, agreed to the advice of age-cap of selectors being 60 years but said the one-state one vote policy might wreck an already established structure of the BCCI.
Presently there are three state associations Maharashtra, Mumbai and Vidarbha - each functioning independently in the state of Maharashtra and three more- Gujarat, Baroda, and Saurashtra - each functioning independently in the state of Gujarat. They have now got just one vote each in the BCCI elections. The proposal made by the Lodha Committee said that the six votes should be reduced to only two, one from a state, with one association representing its respective state at the board on a rotational basis for one year.
"I could not understand why Maharashtra have only one vote. How can a place like Mumbai, which has done so much for cricket, vote only after three years?" Kapil was quoted by Espncricinfo. "Yes, we need change, (but) I think the cricketing work should be done by cricketers and administrative work should be done by administrators.
"They should sit down and discuss what is best for cricket. Some of the recommendations, I feel, are too much, but some of them I feel is the need of the hour for the betterment of the game. I was so happy when three cricketers picked the national coach. But, let us not take anything away from the BCCI. They have looked after this game for almost 60-80 years."
One of the Lodha Committee recommendations also states that administrators of the board and the state association can hold office for a maximum of nine years, three terms of three years, with a three-year cooling-off period between each.But Gavaskar isn’t too convinced with the idea and believes the existing system in the BCCI was a good blueprint for administrators at the state level.
"What is the pinnacle of an administrator's career? It is becoming the president. You don't just become the president in three years. You are the president of the board because you serve some terms such as vice-president. Once you come to that level, once you have finished that (president's) term, you then don't come back as the representative of your state association because how are the new ideas going to come?
"Once you have done that I think you should say, 'Thank you very much. Let us now have somebody else representing my state association.' That is the kind of thing that will help."Kapil Dev also echoed the same sentiments as Shastri saying the three-year term was harsh and that they should have at least five years.
“Minimum five years sounds very good. Three years is too quick,” he said.The board has to amend and tweak its rules and regulations as per the Lodha directive by September 30 with the first phase of reforms which has recommendations on 11 topics should be done by October 15.
The second list of timelines comprises of the state elections—where each association will have to hold their poll by November 15. The other directs the BCCI to have their AGM and elections before December 15. The new IPL governing council and BCCI committees will have to be established by December 30. The BCCI, however, has started ignoring the Lodha committee recommendations as they held their AGM last Wednesday and appointed a 5-member national selectors panel where everyone is below 60 years.
The Supreme Court had accepted major recommendations of the Lodha Committee in July. The court had then requested the three-member panel also comprising former apex court judges Ashok Bhan and R V Raveendran to look that the recommendations were implemented.
The court had, however, decided to let Parliament take a call on whether the functioning of BCCI can be brought under RTI as recommended by the Lodha Panel and whether to legalise betting in cricket or not.