On January 30, 2017, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), which thought it would never see such a day ever was left shell-shocked. That day, the Supreme Court, despite all possible attempts from the board's legal luminaries, appointed a four-member Committee of Administrators (CoA) to implement the Justice R.M. Lodha Committee reforms. It also asked the committee to oversee the running of day-to-day affairs of the board with the help of its chief executive officer, until a newly elected body is formed.
To add to the unprecedented situation, the mighty cricket board was reduced to a headless chicken as its president Anurag Thakur was removed by the apex court over charges of obstructing the implementation of reforms. The four-member CoA consisted of former Comptroller and Auditor General Vinod Rai, former India women's team captain Diana Edulji, historian and author Ramchandra Guha and banker Vikram Limaye. Chairman Rai was fairly confident that putting the reforms in place would not take much effort as it was an SC order and any non-compliance by a member would result in contempt of court. He gave his committee six to eight months. In the BCCI, only three office bearers remained—acting President C.K. Khanna, acting Secretary Amitabh Chowdhary and Treasurer Anirudh Chaudhry.
Perhaps, the CoA was aware that they would face hurdles at every step but it was also confident that they could overcome these. The impediments came from various directions—from the remaining office bearers, within the BCCI, state associations and outside the BCCI, including the disqualified members. This continues even now.
While the reforms process remains in a limbo as the matter is back in the SC, the CoA finds itself entangled in the day-to-day running of cricket administration. CEO Rahul Johri, under instructions of the court’s order, has sought CoA's guidance, orders and instructions of the game’s overall administration from his headquarters in Mumbai. The good news—and the board members would not deny this—is that the CoA has done a good job in ensuring that the valuations of the game and the team have gone up.
States where the real rot in administration exists, with officials continuing for decades without subjecting themselves to full probity or accountability, who have had unhindered access to massive subsidies doled out by the BCCI from its overflowing coffers and whose primary interests are harmed by the implementation of the Lodha reforms have gone back to court asserting that the reforms do not apply to them. The matter is stuck right there at the apex court at a three-judge special bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra, justices A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud. A lack of decision will keep the state associations happy as they would continue to run the show in the interim.
As for the BCCI functioning, there is a clear divide between employees led by the CEO and the remaining office bearers. There are bitter differences between the three office bearers—infighting is rampant. The trio were ordered to be present in person by the SC after the CoA filed a stinging status report in the court detailing how they impeded implementation of reforms as well as its functioning.
Its first challenge came in the form of the fight between the BCCI (the N. Srinivasan camp) and the Shashank Manohar-led International Cricket Council. The money, and through it the power, is what the cricket board officials had lived and breathed in the past. This was their lifeline and not surprisingly, they fought tooth and nail for it. The CoA had barely taken charge when it was saddled with sorting out the undoing of the 'big three' without compromising India’s interest and power.
While the financial solutions were arrived at after much heartburn, it took a meeting between the state associations and the CoA to impress the board members that it wasn’t the money the BCCI was losing, but a changed governance pattern in the ICC that would no longer make it simple for it to manage the votes in its favour of the ICC. It also assured the Indian cricket team that its participation in Champions Trophy in England would not be in jeopardy as it was then threatened by some of the existing office bearers.
With cricket operations now being managed by a set of professionals in its head office, the CoA had then to step directly into the cricketing matters related to differences between then coach Anil Kumble and skipper Virat Kohli. When the officials failed to sort it, the CoA roped in Sourav Ganguly-led Cricket Affairs Committee (CAC). But facing Kohli’s adamant stand on the issue, the CAC had to search for a new coach and was unhappy with the manner in which the entire process was handled by the CoA and other officials.
But the old guard was still there—omnipresent in spirit and in person.
Meanwhile, the SC verdict was getting almost a year old. The court had ordered that Justice Lodha Committee's recommendations were to be implemented in its entirety.
The CoA advised the BCCI office bearers to call Special General Meetings (SGM) to accept the reforms and pass a new constitution. Three SGMs were called, but the BCCI members failed to pass the reforms and under the garb of problem areas, detailed about the problems in implementing key reform which form the basis of accountable and transparent functioning.
One year later, where is the Indian cricket administration? It remains without a duly elected team of office bearers. The treasurer has been asked by the court to respond to allegations of threats to the chief financial officer of the BCCI. He has denied the allegations.
Both the CoA and the CEO have, in their separate replies to the Supreme Court, detailed the “unbecoming conduct” of the treasurer who is a known confidant of ousted president N. Srinivasan.
Two of its original members have parted ways and the burden of running the show has fallen on Rai and Edulji. It has not been a perfect score for them with the latter being embroiled in a few controversies.
Meanwhile, Johri and the team of professionals presently managing Indian cricket have not been spared either. Their working and decisions have been questioned by the old guard but again, in the absence of institutional checks due to lack of elections, the officials escape internal scrutiny. Their decisions too, have been questioned but some sympathies still do lie with them as they are pitted in a rough, corporate environment against deeply entrenched vested interests.
As the SC takes its time to pass a final order which could pave the way for a new constitution and elections both in the states and the board, the lack of strong institutional checks and balances have started to show directly in the game. At the end of the day, there is nothing much that the CoA can feel happy about.
