‘If judges can run cricket, good luck’ Thakur was young, but not a novice in administration
NEWDELHI: Unfazed by his sacking as BCCI president by the Supreme Court on Monday, Anurag Thakur took a dig at the judiciary.
Thakur said if the court felt the Board would do well under retired judges, “I wish them all the best”.
The apex court sacked Thakur and secretary Ajay Shirke on Monday for the Board’s resistance to implement the Lodha Committee reforms, but Thakur insisted the BCCI remained the best-run sports body in the country.
“For me it was not a personal battle, it was a battle for the autonomy of the sports body. I respect the Supreme Court aand if the judges feel that the BCCI could do better under retired judges, I am sure Indian cricket will do well under their guidance,” Thakur said in a tongueand-cheek reaction on social media.
“My commitment to the best of Indian cricket and autonomy of sports will always remain,” he said in the video clip.
“Over the years, Indian cricket saw its best in terms of administration and development of the game. BCCI is the best-managed sports organisation in the country with defined procedures. India has the best infrastructure built and maintained by state associations with help of the BCCI. India has more quality players than anywhere in the world,” said an adamant Thakur.
The Supreme Court also initiated contempt proceedings against Thakur and sought his response on why he should not be held liable for obstructing the implementation of the reforms.
Shirke too was unmoved but hoped the Board did not lose its international standing owing to the upheaval.
“I have no reaction (to his sacking). If that is the Supreme Court order, I cease to be secretary. It cannot get any simpler, my role in BCCI is over,” said Shirke.
Asked if the current scenario could have been avoided, Shirke replied in the negative. “At the end of the day, the BCCI comprises of members. It is not about me or the president. It is about the members. I have no reason to go into history. History can be judged by people differently. I have no attachment to the post, I have other things to do. I returned to the Board as there was a vacancy and I was elected unopposed. After this (the sacking), I am fine with it and have no regrets,” he said.
In its December 15 hearing, the top court had threatened contempt and perjury proceedings against Thakur for asking ICC CEO Dave Richardson for a letter but denying it on oath. Thakur was warned he might have to go to jail if found guilty.
Thakur had asked for a letter from Richardson that the appointment of a CAG nominee would have compromised the Board’s autonomy and would have amounted to government interference.
The Bench headed by Chief Justice TS Thakur and comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud said the working of the BCCI would be looked after by a committee of adminissenior trators and requested advocate Fali S Nariman and senior advocate Gopal Subramanian, who was assisting in the matter as amicus curiae, to assist the court in nominating persons of impeccable integrity for the panel. Reacting to the Supreme
TONGUEINCHEEK After being removed from the post of presidentship, Anurag Thakur takes a dig at the SC verdict
Court order, Justice Lodha said the reforms have to be implemented. “This is the logical consequence because once the reforms were accepted by the Supreme Court, they had to be implemented. There were obstructions and obviously this had to happen and it has happened. It is victory for cricket. The game will flourish.”
Being at the helm of affairs, if they were not able to implement the SC order, these consequences were bound to follow & that’s what happened
The panel suggested a maximum of nine years in office with a three-year cooling off period. This would have resulted in the top brass having limited experience, affecting the routine operations. The panel proposed including a CAG on the apex council of the BCCI. However, Anurag Thakur and the BCCI believed that it amounted to government interference in the functioning of the board and had reportedly sought a letter from the ICC. However, this resulted in Thakur being charged with perjury. The Lodha Panel wanted the Indian Cricket Board to come under the RTI (Right to Information) Act. However, the BCCI opposed the move. Thakur argued that the BCCI was governed by the Tamil Nadu Societies Act. It did not take money from the government and it was an institution that was not controlled by either central or the state government. MUMBAI: Having risen quickly to the top of the BCCI, presiAnurag dent Thakur’s reign was cut short when the Supreme Court removed him and secretary Ajay Shirke from their posts on Monday for not complying with its order to implement administrative reforms in the BCCI. Anurag Thakur and Ajay Shirke paid the price for defying the SC order which had been passed in July last year. The Apex Court had accepted most of the recommendations made by the three-member Lodha panel, which had been set up to look into the operations of the BCCI. The Board rejected a few of the recommendations.
At the age of 41, Anurag Thakur had become the secperson ond youngest to lead the BCCI after Fatehsingh Rao Gaekwad, who was 33 when he took charge of the Board in 1963. Before that election in May last year, which made him the 34th president of the BCCI, the 42-year-old had held various posts in the cash-rich sports body.
In September 2011, he was elected joint-secretary in N Srinivasan’s regime. His tenure was marked by his defiance of Srinivasan --- he openly spoke out against the establishment in the aftermath of the corruption scandal which rocked IPL in 2013.
Thakur rose to the secretary’s position in March 2015 before going on to become president. Given the ages of others in cricket administration, Thakur stood out due to his young age. However, he was no novice. He had been the Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association (HPCA) president since 2000, when he assumed the role as a 26-yearold.
While he captained Punjab and the North Zone at the agegroup level, he played a firstclass match for Himachal Pradesh in the 2000-01 Ranji Trophy season.
He had a forgettable outing, scoring a seven-ball duck and claiming two wickets in nine overs.
Thakur is alleged to have played in that match only because he wanted to become a junior national selector. The BCCI rules at the time mandated that only those with first-class cricket experience qualified to be selectors.
This is a landmark judgement. It is good for Indian cricket and it will be back on track. There is light now and we are thankful to the Supreme Court.
After agreeing to hold just a routine meeting, the BCCI staged its AGM and even elected committes. The BCCI appointed a five-member selection panel, which flouted the agreement with the Lodha panel.
The Lodha Panel had recommended separate governing councils for both the IPL and BCCI. Since many state associations have not built a revenue model, the BCCI opposed this bifurcation.
The Lodha Committee suggested one man for one post and ministers and corrupt officials should stay away from cricket. This put Anurag Thakur under pressure. The panel found conflict of interest among officials too. The BCCI vehemently opposed the move. The Lodha Panel recommendation of no commercial breaks during live cricket matches potentially resulted in substantial revenue loss. The Indian Board feared that any restriction on broadcasters would have resulted in reviewing original arrangements. The media rights of the BCCI have been kept on hold.