Who will stop the all powerful BCCI?

The English and Australian cricket boards dominated the world cricket scene for a long time. In the last two decades, things have changed; the roles have been reversed. The Asian-bloc has become extremely powerful and the situation is such that the ICC can make no significant decision without the blessings of the boards from the Asian countries. With its growing economy and hunger for cricket, India has become the leader of the Asian bloc and home of modern international cricket. With such power and success comes great responsibility. However, the BCCI has not played the role of a responsible leader.

Indian cricket seems to have subconsciously inherited some attributes from its cricket board. In yesteryears, Indian cricketers were renowned for their impeccable on-field behavior. They did not shout, they did not sledge, they did not abuse. Wristy-shots, superb timing and magical spin-bowling did all the talking. In contrast, today's cricketers are not afraid to show aggression and do not shy away from a fight. On one or two occasions, they have been guilty of despicable on-field behavior(Harbhajan and Gambhir are recent examples). But this article is not about the behavior of Indian cricketers; it is about the superciliatory behavior of their caretaker - the Board of Cricket Control in India, in recent times. Fresh in mind are the BCCI's reactions to some admittedly poor umpiring decisions in recent clashes between the Indian and Australian teams and its (lack of) respect and commitment towards the Future Tour Program and cricketing schedules of other countries. However, the most damning reflection of the BCCI's attitude and power has been its successful and monopolistic oppression of the Indian Cricket League. [Latest Update :- Lalit Modi's incredibly insensitive comments about Being Sidelined after the Mumbai attacks(http://usa.cricinfo.com/indveng/content/current/story/380088.html) is probably another close contender to the top spot - but in my defense, this article was written before that]

Despite all the bullying and big-brother attitude from the BCCI, the fact that ICL has been able to get on its feet and run two tournaments within two years is astounding. It is a testament to the demand for Twenty-Twenty Cricket in India and the organizational/marketing skills of the ICL management. It amazes me that such little attention is given to ICL by mainstream media(in India and abroad). Did you know that ICL had its own website - http://www.indiancricketleague.in. I did not!

Why is no one standing up to BCCI's arrogance? Why is no one questioning its abuse of power? Other cricket boards and the International Cricket Council seem to be quite content as long as they get a share of the pie. I won't complain about the ICC - they are weak and pointless. I think the blame lies with us - the Indian cricketers, the Indian media and the Indian cricket fans . Are we turning a blind eye, because we think of this as some sort of redemption? Or do we think it is not patriotic to question our own board's policies?


First and foremost, I am disappointed with senior Indian cricketers. I am surprised that senior statesmen like Tendulkar, Dravid, Ganguly, Kumble and Laxman are not questioning the board on their ICL policy. Aren't some ICL cricketers their ex-team mates? And surely, they do not want prodigious young talent from the ICL to be prevented from reaching the higher levels of international cricket? With decades of experience and massive fan-follwing, why are they being silent? What about retired cricketers like Shastri, Gavaskar and Manjrekar who have direct access to media? Do they not care about young Indian cricketers? Are they indifferent because so many kids play cricket in India, and the fact that a few are playing in a rebel league doesn't matter?

Second, the Indian media is probably the biggest culprit given its influence and reach. The difference in media coverage between the IPL and the ICL says it all. IPL news occupies entire pages on national newspapers, while ICL is lucky to get a small column. Isn't there a big moral and legal issue here? How was BCCI able to prevent ICL cricketeres from entering cricket grounds? How did the BCCI prevent ICL cricketers(even those from other countries) from playing international cricket or even other Twenty Twenty leagues? In today's world, cricket is a profession and all cricketers including ICL cricketers are professionals. What gives BCCI the ability to prevent other organizations and entities from seeking the services of these cricketers? The same media that celebrates our democracy, our secularism and all those wonderful ideals just watches with folded hands, when the biggest sport in the country is being monopolized using unfair practices. It has failed in its duty by not questioning the autocratic self-serving practices of the BCCI. The Indian media is probably the only thing that can affect the BCCI, but sadly it chooses to focus on national selection issues, team-squabbles, bollywood escapades of cricketers and other similar 'interesting' news.

Third, as Indian cricket fans, we are also culpable. We have failed to question our board's actions and policies. In my humble opinion, the average Indian fan tends to take cricket too personally. We need to be open-minded and objective when it comes to critical issues. We can still be passionate fans, but without being rabid nationalists. We have not been vocal in criticizing the BCCI.

I am not trying to defend Twenty Twenty or dethrone test-cricket. I am just questioning the monopolistic behavior of the Indian cricket board. I am questioning the inaction from senior Indian cricketers, the media and Indian cricket fans. A wise man once said, 'Power corrupts and Absolute Power corrupts Absolutely'. It seems to be true at least as far as cricket goes.