Opinion Speaking truth to cricket
That apex court had to wield the broom underlines BCCI’s abdication, inability to make course correction.
In a landmark judgment on Tuesday, the Supreme Court finally nailed conflict of interest, the main villain in the messy saga of Indian cricket. The court has ruled that the BCCI elections have to be held within six weeks and N. Srinivasan cannot contest till such time as he has “commercial interests”, asking him to choose between the IPL and the BCCI. The court has gone one step further. It has appointed a three-member panel that has the powers to change the framework and functioning of the BCCI. In theory, this panel can alter the face of Indian cricket. It has the powers to comb through the labyrinth of controversial clauses of the BCCI rules and suggest changes — right from how it is governed internally to how financial dealings are made with the outside world.
In the immediate term, though, the focus will be on the remarkably stubborn Srinivasan and the fate of two franchises, Chennai Super Kings and Rajasthan Royals. By striking down the controversial amendment to the BCCI’s Rule 6.2.4, which allowed its officials to have commercial interests in the IPL and Champions League T20, the court has pushed Srinivasan into a corner. Srinivasan’s dual role as president of the BCCI and owner of Chennai Super Kings is now no longer viable and he must choose one. The verdict doesn’t prevent him from continuing as the International Cricket Council (ICC) president, though, until elections are held. Srinivasan’s future with the parent body of global cricket will depend on the power equations that emerge after the elections as the candidate for the ICC presidency is nominated by the Indian board. So, the cat-and-mouse game may well continue. The 130-page judgment also offered him some respite, giving him a clean chit on allegations of a cover-up in the IPL spot-fixing case.
The three-member panel, comprising Justices R.M. Lodha, Ashok Bhan and R.V. Ravindran, will have six months to decide the fate of Chennai Super Kings and Rajasthan Royals, whose owners were implicated by the Mudgal panel probing the spot-fixing and corruption in IPL. The court had earlier said Srinivasan’s son-in-law, Gurunath Meiyappan, and Raj Kundra of Rajasthan Royals were involved in betting and held that Meiyappan was proved to be a team official and not just a cricket enthusiast. For a year and a half, the highest court in the land tried to cajole and coax the BCCI into introspection and reform — and failed. That the court took matters in its own hands in the end speaks volumes about the sorry state of Indian cricket.
Share
