Explained: BCCI’s shadow wars
As Srinivasan v Thakur hots up, SHAMIK CHAKRABARTY chronicles the playing, missing and hitting in BCCI.
Q: How were equations in the BCCI earlier?
In 2007, cricket’s trouble child, Indian Premier League, was born, and became the root cause of several controversies and infighting. In the IPL’s early days, the board was one happy family: Sharad Pawar was president, Niranjan Shah secretary and N Srinivasan treasurer. Lalit Modi, the GenNext administrator, was put in charge of the event. Together, they fought the common enemy, the rebel Indian Cricket League.
Also Read: Meet the man who ate a cake with BCCI secy Anurag Thakur
Before the IPL, BCCI’s constitution didn’t allow officebearers to have direct or indirect commercial interests in any event organised by it. Amendment of the ‘conflict of interest’ clause saw N Srinivasan’s India Cements own Chennai Super Kings. Lalit Modi’s friends and family too were part of the cozy club of owners that ran the “Indian Parivar League”.
Also Read: Share bookie info with your family; Anurag Thakur to N Srinivasan
Q: How did the equations change?
Sharad Pawar’s presence kept the BCCI’s ambitious members together. Shashank Manohar took charge in 2008, and Srinivasan became secretary. They worked closely to end Lalit Modi’s reign as IPL’s ringmaster. There were grave allegations of financial irregularities, and Modi was suspended. Three years later, he was expelled.
When did things change for Srinivasan?
During Srinivasan’s tenure, a constitution amendment increased officebearers’ terms to three years from two. Also, any member could become president from any zone, a change that gave Srinivasan the chance to remain in charge even after three years. Srinivasan had it planned — as East Zone was ready to propose his extension. But the 2013 IPL controversy that resulted in the arrest of his son-in-law changed everything. The Supreme Court struck down the ‘conflict of interest’ amendment, and Srinivasan was forced to step aside.
Also Read: It’s not proper to respond to Anurag Thakur through the media: N Srinivasan
Q: How did Srinivasan come to lose power?
After the SC barred him from contesting the BCCI election, Srinivasan wanted Sanjay Patel to be president. The Pawar faction didn’t agree, and Srinivasan floated the name of BJP leader Anurag Thakur. Pawar sought the help of the BJP leadership, and had his way. Consensus candidate Jagmohan Dalmiya became president, Thakur secretary. The new regime ensured that very few Srinivasan loyalists remained in positions of power.
Q: How did Srinivasan’s patch-up with Pawar backfire?
In his bid to undermine the Thakur-Dalmiya clique, Srinivasan reached out to Pawar. This would not go down well with Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, a powerful voice in Indian cricket. The battlelines were drawn — Thakur hinted that Srinivasan’s days as ICC chairman were numbered, and later this year at their AGM, the BCCI would name his replacement. On the day the working committee was to question Srinivasan’s contentious de-merger of CSK, Thakur’s picture with a suspected bookie made its way to the media. Subsequently, Srinivasan was blamed for snooping on rivals in the BCCI.
Q: Is Dalmiya a comeback king or a puppet?
He is Indian cricket’s most seasoned administrator. Srinivasan had a hand in making Dalmiya ad hoc BCCI chief when he stepped aside, but that didn’t buy him Dalmiya’s loyalty. Once in charge as elected president, he refused to do Srinivasan’s bidding. Dalmiya’s rivals say that the remote that controls him is in the BJP office in Delhi.
Q: Is the war administrators vs politicians?
Every BCCI faction has both politicians and administrators. The government of the day has always decided power equations in BCCI. Besides, when in the board office, politicians collaborate — regardless of party affiliations. That is why the BJP leadership values Pawar’s words more than Srinivasan, and Congress MP Rajeev Shukla is preferred over industrialist Ajay Shirke as IPL chief.
