Board wrong in portraying itself as a martyr
The overdrive the BCCI has gone into to project itself as a victim of its success may make sense to its followers, but one also presumes it is aware of the phrase “the lady doth protest too much methinks”. William Shakespeare may have used these oft-quoted lines in a different context in Hamlet, but its meaning remains clear. It is an insincere articulation, a poor defence of something which may not have a convincing explanation.
The Board may have reason to feel aggrieved on how is the Indian Premier League to be blamed for one of the worst droughts India is facing. It may be justified in the grouse why cricket alone is being targeted and not golf courses, swimming pools and other ventures which are water guzzlers. Why do the courts want to curb only the IPL’s extravagant ways and overuse of water to maintain grounds and pitches in times of drought, is the question BCCI officials are raising.
Implicit in this lament is a sense of frustration that comes more from it being the target of the judiciary which is forcing it to mend its errant ways and implement the Lodha panel recommendations. The BCCI is resisting these recommendations, which in general perception are nothing but pragmatic and transparent ways of how a sports body should function
SINCE THE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE AT THE HELM FEEL THEY WOULD BE THE VICTIMS OF THIS CHANGE, THEY ARE BOUND TO CONFUSE SELF WITH THE BOARD
for the betterment of the sport it governs.
Since the individuals who are at the helm feel they would be the victims of this radical change in its functioning, they are bound to confuse self with the Board.
They have told the court in no uncertain terms that the Supreme Court lacks the authority to force this change. The Chief Justice of India, Justice Thakur, has been pulling up the Board at each of its hearings, but it is still defiant.
Since the Lodha panel recommendations have vast public acceptance, the Board is careful not to be overtly critical, choosing just one or two points to criticise in public.
It obviously feels that since IPL is extremely popular, it can use the court ruling in Maharashtra against holding of matches there to ram in the point that cricket and its administrators are being targeted for being successful. They have even gone to the extent of saying that if this continues, the Board may be forced to shift the IPL to a foreign country.
The Board officials are so insular and cut off from ground reality that they don’t realise that on issues like drought, that too as severe as this one, where human lives are concerned, they need to be seen as more sensitive and caring. The IPL may not be the reason for the drought, but to use the court ruling as a blackmailing tool to portray itself as a martyr seems callous.
True or not, if the IPL has come to symbolise excesses, who has to share a major portion of the blame? Who takes the blame for the Board being seen as an opaque body resistant to change for the good of the game and image of the administrators?
Instead of blaming the media and courts, the Board should introspect, only then will it realise why the cricket-crazy public applauds each time the Supreme Court reprimands it.