AT A time when the chorus is to move beyond former India players – who undoubtedly lack administrative skills, the Indian board is pinning its hope on finding another cricketer to head the body. Why is the BCCI still obsessed with former cricketers heading its body when the Sourav Ganguly experiment hasn’t gone down well? Isn’t it time to think differently and make a unanimous choice rather than a face-saving one?
With all due respect to Ganguly’s acumen as a captain of the Indian team, he couldn’t manage to impress the high and mighty of the BCCI.
Those who are batting for his exit have made it clear that BCCI secretary Jay Shah showed a lot more leadership qualities than Ganguly in administrative matters. It is a different thing that Ganguly was Shah’s left-arm spin in friendly matches before the AGMs. But now, there is a clear mismatch. It is understood that all the promises made by Ganguly haven’t been fulfilled. It is also true that the pandemic caused a lot of hardships for the BCCI management to perform to the best of its potential, but the scope was always there. Instead, there are accusations about Ganguly advising on the playing XI to selection matters (which the former captain would certainly deny). The acceptability of Ganguly as a BCCI boss is at an all-time low. It can be said that removing Virat Kohli as the ODI captain could have been handled better which even the BCCI admitted to it.
In a dismal tenure, Ganguly’s decision to host a day-night Test match against Bangladesh way back in 2019 in Kolkata is the only feather in his cap from the time he was made the BCCI president. Also, the way he fought in favour of staging the Ranji Trophy and other domestic competition were something that clearly speaks volume about the former skipper.
However, when Ganguly started selling himself as a brand to corporations that went completely against the ethics of BCCI. Legally speaking, Ganguly wasn’t at fault for becoming a brand ambassador for different companies. He was permitted to do so by outgoing management then headed by the Supreme Court-appointed Committee of Administrators boss Vinod Rai. In the end, it left a bad taste in the mouth for several board members. Time and again, this engagement between corporate and Ganguly was discussed – so much so – that it was often said that he was using his position for getting those commercial deals. But Ganguly was unfazed. He nursed his commercial interests well much to the dissatisfaction of the board members. Fortunately or unfortunately, those anti-Ganguly voices are steaming out in the open now and going for the kill.
Does this mean the end of the road for Ganguly? Does this mean that Ganguly won’t be given a chance to make amends? Does this mean that Ganguly’s chance of making it to the ICC top post has gone up in smoke?
The answers are not forthcoming but Ganguly seems to have done his own credentials a lot of harm.
Why was the Lodha Committee formed? The answer is simple: Lodha committee was formed because of the spot-fixing allegation leveled against certain players. Thereafter, some of the officials were also named in the Mudgal Commission report – that probed the 2013 spot-fixing allegations. So, the moot point is that if the players are the ones who are responsible for bringing in the Lodha committee, why is the BCCI still stuck on making another former cricketer as the president?
But the core of the problem seems to be in the contention that cricket is best served by cricketers. But that is not always true as a look at the history of the BCCI and state associations will confirm it. For example, several cricketers have headed the Hyderabad Cricket Association in the last 30 years but the affairs of the state association are nothing to rave about.
Only a few cricketers have been able to don the mantle of administrators successfully. Even before the Lodha committee came into existence, several non-cricketers had done yeoman service to cricket. One cannot forget the likes of Jagmohan Dalmiya, Sharad Pawar and others at the BCCI.
It doesn’t mean that a soft-spoken and former World Cupper Roger Binny would do a bad job than Ganguly or vice-versa – but when you know that a politician or an administrator with good political connections can make a good BCCI president, shouldn’t the BCCI adopt a flexible approach?
This news is republished from another source. You can check the original article here