I warned about BCCI’s incompetent vision of cricket a few months back. Here is an article agreeing on my stance. - funguy
India’s money buys ambition
COMMENT
Mike Coward October 21, 2006
THE arrogance of Indian cricket at the moment beggars belief. It has become the game’s imperialist and is revelling in the discomfort being felt by the rest of the cricket world.
And make no mistake, the rest of the cricket world is living in fear of the brash and bolshy Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) which apparently intends to usurp the International Cricket Council (ICC).
That it has neither the wherewithal nor wisdom to convincingly run the game in its own country apparently matters not a jot. It is hell-bent on running the game throughout the world.
It has nothing to do with competence or imagination. It is a matter of naked ambition and the power of the purse.
Of course, it may well be brinkmanship. But no-one is sure this is the case and the game could be irreparably damaged if the fast-talking Indian governors cannot be encouraged to act with some measure of humility and responsibility.
If it is not brinkmanship, the ICC will be smartly rendered impotent and irrelevant.
Indeed, no longer can it be taken for granted that the international cricket family will be together after what is bound to be one of the most rancorous meetings in the ICC’s 97-year history in Mumbai on November 3 and 4.
If the puffed-up, cashed-up Indian powerbrokers reckon they can prosper without Australia and England they may just opt to leave the fold.
And given their fantastic, even obscene, wealth they would take most of the family with them.
India must decide whether it wishes to remain a part of the international cricket family. It is as fundamental as that.
It may sound crass but there can be little doubt India sees this as payback time. For many years India and neighbours Pakistan, Sri Lanka and, more recently, Bangladesh, have been treated with disdain by the game’s Anglo-centric and generally cocksure establishment.
Year after year these once British satellites withstood the imperialist, paternalistic prattle, which, at best, was dismissive and culturally elitist and, at worst, racist. In the main, eyes were lowered and tongues were tied. But inside, the good people of the subcontinent burned. And a good many still do.
But, since India and Pakistan set aside their enmities to stage the 1987 World Cup under the banner “Cricket for Peace”, there has been a fervent belief that the region would have its day; the dependants would strike back. That day has come.
Now Indian cricket has such wealth, it believes it should take control of the game. And, with the money, has come power and influence, which is being wielded without any responsibility to the greater good. It is consumed by self-interest.
Of course, India’s clout is undeniable. Only three of the 96 countries that comprise the ICC make money: India, Australia and England. And India makes most of it – somewhere between 70 and 80 per cent. No one constituent of the ruling body has ever known such power. While founding members England and Australia had the power of veto at the table until 1993 they never enjoyed such colossal wealth.
But the BCCI has become drunk with power and its behaviour is becoming increasingly reckless and potentially destructive. The recent observation by provocative BCCI vice-president Lalit Modi that the ICC needed an overhaul and “a chief executive from Afro-Asia, someone who understands the problems of the majority of ICC members” was particularly unhelpful.
At best this is a culturally elitist remark mocking the ICC, which is presently playing the Champions Trophy under its “Spirit of Cricket” flag in India.
Those closest to the organisation of the Champions Trophy believe the BCCI has tried to undermine the event and embarrass the ICC as negotiations begin for the sale of ICC commercial rights from 2007 to 2015.
The ICC has had to grin and bear it as its hands are comprehensively tied. Everyone cowers when India flexes its financial muscle and that includes the ICC.
Modi, who has taunted the ICC by saying India does not have to play in all limited-overs events, insists the ICC’s income would be reduced to 5 per cent of its current figure if India left the family.
While he does not represent India at the ICC, Modi has been at the front line of domestic marketing matters over the past three years as the worth of the BCCI’s media rights rose from $US40 million ($52.7m) to $US612m. And this is projected to rise to a billion dollars in the next four years.
Without India the ICC cannot entertain the thought of tripling its rights fee to $US1.5billion as has been forecast by some analysts. It is as simple as that. All its major sponsors have massive holdings and interests in India and the television audience throughout the subcontinent runs into hundreds of millions.
The BCCI has stunned the ICC by declaring its intention to become a media player and bid for the rights. Whether this is possible will be vigorously workshopped in Mumbai. Legally, it is understood there is nothing to stop it. Ethically, it is another matter and there are myriad and complex issues of governance. It is thought a number of countries are seeking legal opinions.
That 70 per cent or more of the game’s monies could be in the hands of one constituent of the nominal ruling body is causing widespread disquiet.
India’s control over the game could never extend beyond financial considerations. For all its wealth the BCCI has never managed to get its house in order. Essentially it is an unstructured, unfocused, amateurish organisation without even a dedicated headquarters to speak of.
While it has unimaginable sums of money in bank vaults, at the same time it is bankrupt of inspiration and vision. Historically it has paid scant regard to the welfare of its players and the state of its major grounds and continues to treat the hoi polloi with utter contempt.
Certainly the crisis provides Cricket Australia with a considerable challenge. Australia is the other celebrated powerbroker of the modern game because of its initiatives in governance, administration, coaching, marketing player welfare and, of course, on-field performance.
And, perhaps, counselling? It would be a good start.
Source: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20617223-2722,00.html