EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH BCCI's CoA CHAIRMAN VINOD RAI: ‘$570 million is a mirage [for BCCI]. Nobody’s going to give us the 2014 ICC model’

Supreme Court-appointed Committee of Administrators chairman says a reasonable amount should be thrashed through dialogue and debate with ICC

By QAISER MOHAMMAD ALI, Outlook magazine, May 22, 2017

As Comptroller and Auditor General of India (2008-2013), Vinod Rai brought out some major audits like that of 2G Spectrum allocation, coal mines allocation and corruption during the 2010 Delhi Commonwealth Games. Now, as head of the Supreme Court-appointed Committee of Administrators (CoA) he is trying to reform the BCCI as per the Lodha Committee recommendations.

Excerpts from the Exclusive Interview:

What made you agree to the Supreme Court’s offer to head the CoA?

When SC makes a request you have no option, but to accept it with due humility because it is a matter of privilege for a person to be picked up by the Supreme Court.

After working with the BCCI for a few months, would you say it is the most challenging task that you have undertaken in your professional career?

Not really. In my 45-year career, I have handled far more challenging assignments. But the only difficulty is that the BCCI does not seem to have a systematic or scientific structure of governance, no prescribed or uniform system of administration, and [for] rules and laws etc., the applicability does not seem to be inform. So, we [CoA] are engaged in a job of trying to make it systematic and make sure that it is subject to good governance, going forward.

What exactly was your message to BCCI’s state associations on May 6 after which they had a change of heart -- from being confrontational to being ready for negotiations with ICC on revenue sharing model?

After seeing all that what was appearing in the media and talking to some of the state associations I got the feeling that they were not very much in picture about what was happening between the BCCI and the ICC. So, they didn’t have the perspective. And I think they had not been sensitised about the issues that the BCCI was taking up. So I thought it was best for me to talk to them directly and to sensitise them about the issues that the BCCI was facing vis-à-vis the ICC. I must compliment them for the maturity they showed: once they got to know what the issues really were they realised that they had a very incorrect picture or inadequate picture about the so-called dispute between the BCCI and the ICC. The moment they got to know the true picture, all of us got on to the same page and we were on the same wavelength thereafter.

Was there not a single voice that raised doubts about what you were saying?

No. There were certainly doubts before we started the discussion, but by the time we ended with all the five zones, we were all on the same page and even the naysayers had a change of heart and they also decided that pulling out of the Champions Trophy was the most ill-advised action that they would take.

In other words, were the BCCI office-bearers not showing the true picture to the state associations?

I don’t think they had a dialogue at all. After the new model of governance was introduced by the ICC [in 2014], the BCCI had an SGM in February 2016 in which probably all the states were not introduced [to governance model] and all that the SGM discussed was the financial model. They never got down to the model of governance which was undergoing a change and which is making a change to the constitution of the ICC. It means once introduced it becomes permanent. The financial model undergoes a change every two or three years and can change once again, but governance model doesn’t change. And I don’t think that was explained to them properly.

Do you think it was deliberately not explained to them?

No, I wouldn’t say it was deliberate. I don’t think anybody just took note of the fact that there was much more to explained than this. What happens is that financial issues hit you first, and the entire attention got diverted towards that side.

Why does the BCCI need so much money when it already has Rs.5000 crore-Rs.6000 crore net worth and has good infrastructure too?

I may not subscribe to that viewpoint. For any institution, if there is revenue accruing to it for any activity performed by it, that justifiable revenue must accrue to it. So, if the BCCI deserves a certain fee or a share of that revenue, they must get it. That’s why I felt that if the BCCI was supposed to get $570 million, for example, they should get it, or if they had to get $450 million they should get it. And $293 million which was being offered was certainly very incorrect; am not saying inadequate. BCCI can always make it. But incorrect vis-à-vis other countries who also contribute to the revenues of the ICC, and seeing the share what India contributes, the BCCI deserves to get much more.

Had this meeting between the CoA and the state associations been convened earlier than May 6, a lot of negative talk could have been avoided. Isn’t it?

Certainly. A large part of it could have been avoided. But we got the feeling that there were some interested parties that were wanting to put out news items that suited their interests. But we did make an attempt to sensitise the state associations, or the least at an SGM, sometime in March, after the CoA was appointed. But they scheduled the SGM on a date I was travelling abroad. And we made a request to them to reschedule it, but they didn’t agree to that. That was the time I wanted to explain to them that ‘look, this is the factual position and any decision that you people take must be predicated on the facts that I am placing on the table for you’, because I don’t think they weren’t sensitised about them. We also gave them a presentation on the ICC financial model and we explained to them that I’ve had discussions with representatives of eight countries’ Boards. Only Zimbabwe I couldn’t meet because I was travelling, but Vikram Limaye [COA member] and Rahul Johri [BCCI CEO] met them. To all eight Boards, we proposed a win-win formula for everybody, in which the share of Indian wasn’t going down and they were going to continue getting what was a much, much higher figure. The only issue is that we all are misled by this figure of $570 million. As I explained to the state associations, $570 million is a mirage. It’s true that it was signed in 2014, but the moment it was signed protests started against it. Then the dispensation at the ICC changed [From N. Srinivasan to Shashank Manohar]. And till today we’ve not received a single dollar as against the 2014 model. And it’s claimed -- I don’t know the truth – that arms were twisted. But the moment the other countries got the opportunity…see, you can’t do anything on a long term basis under duress. They have started speaking up, so we told that it was okay, $570 million -- minus the $125 million cost they had calculated, India’s share was $445 million. Now, the present ICC chairman is offering $390 million, which is very near $445 million. In fact, we had negotiated an amount that would have been higher than $400 million, after discussing with all the states, and am still hopeful that the ICC will accept out share to be higher than, say, $400 million.

You talked about taking the middle path and told that to the BCCI state associations also, and they agreed to take that path eventually as that is a very important segment. Isn’t it?

Not so much the middle path. We are sticking to the 2014 model and I call that a mirage. Nobody is going to give us the 2014 model [revenue share]. They claim that they were made to sign it under duress. I really don’t know. But considering the fact that we got voted out 9-1 [at the ICC Executive Board meeting in April] is very evident that all the countries are arranged against India. And they have offered us $293 million. Both appear unfair. So, that’s why we said that what is reasonable is to be thrashed out and that is a dialogue or a debate we are presently having with the ICC.

How was your meeting with Mr Shashank Manohar a day before he resigned as ICC chairman on March 15?

I had a very good meeting with him, along with Vikram and Rahul, in Mumbai. We discussed for three-four hours and I must say, to his credit, that he was very fair with us and did a lot of straight talking and he put things in the right perspective for us vis-à-vis the ICC. The ICC Directors also have a viewpoint; they also have, if I can call it, a certain ego, and we keep bashing their ego all time. He put all that in perspective. After the meeting when we were leaving and he was going back to Nagpur, I told him ‘Mr Manohar, if you ever consider resigning, do consult us’. He laughed it off. But of course the next day he resigned.

Was Mr Manohar satisfied with the conversation he had with you people?

Both of us – him and us – left very satisfied and convinced about the arguments of both parties. We decided that we’ll work in a collaborative manner and ensure that both parties benefit in the long term.

There’s a perception that Mr Manohar is taking revenge because he didn’t get along with Mr N. Srinivasan and some people see Mr Manohar as an ‘anti-national’ because he is supposedly working ‘against India’. Since he is an independent ICC chairman, is it fair to level those charges against him?

I really don’t know the inter-personal relationship of members of the BCCI over the years. I’ve never followed the history of the BCCI so closely, so I can't say anything about it. But I must say one thing: The ICC model that has been derived is not the Shashank Manohar model; it’s a model that had been derived taking the other countries’ viewpoint. To a large extent, though, being Indians it would appear it is unfair to us. But to a large extent it is fair to lots of countries, and where it is not fair we’ve pointed that out to him; or the share of a certain country is much more than what they deserve we’ve very frankly pointed out to him and he has acceded to our viewpoint. 

After Mr Manohar resigned, it seemed that everything would go back to square one. Later, he agreed to continue.

I don’t know about that, but we were one of the people who thought that we must persuade him to withdraw the resignation because he shares a very good rapport with all the countries and they have deep faith in him. And this deep faith is not because he is a former BCCI president or has got financial muscle or anything like that but because of the fact the he talks to them very frankly, very clearly and on even keel.

After the BCCI scrapped Champions League Twenty20 in 2015, Mr Jagmohan Dalmiya proposed a plan of earning more revenue in that two-week window in September-October. Are you aware of that model?

I heard of it but I shouldn’t be commenting on it because I don’t know it in detail. But you must realise one thing: we can’t be making our players play 300 days in a year. Body fatigue and injuries are very important; the game has become very challenging now. It’s very demanding and it’s not fair to make them play that long, just so that you can garner some revenue.

Many tax issues are confronting BCCI. Since you and Mr Vikram Limaye [Managing Director & CEO of IDFC] are best placed to tackle these tax issues, are you going to look into them and help resolve them?

We haven’t had the time to look into the tax issues in detail. We are only privy to some of the recent cases, like the Kochi IPL case [arbitration], the Stamp Act issues, a long pending arbitration issue with Sahara India, and some more recent ones. But we’ll soon look at it [old cases] and I’d very much want to set up a small group which, in about a month’s time goes into it and comes up with a report. Then we talk to all the agencies with whom these disputes are going and once and for all negotiate a settlement and close them. Otherwise, ultimately they’ll just drag and the only winners in the entire thing will be advocates.

A major issue is of double taxation where both the BCCI and its state associations pay taxes on the same income. That’s a genuine complaint.

Instead of fighting over it, we should have taken up that case with the Central government and get a dispensation for a one-time resolution on that because it’s useless fighting the government all the time.

The damning Deloitte audit reports on state associations have been distributed to them for their observations/reply. How many states have responded?

I don’t remember, so can’t say. Well, damning or otherwise…that’s why I’ve said systems have not been put in place. That’s the entire problem.

What action is going to be taken on Deloitte reports?

I will have to discuss it with the states; I don’t want to do it just now because this meeting [on May 6] was for a different purpose. But we’ll soon discuss with the states zone-wise.

It’s very clear from the Deloitte reports that all kinds of financial irregularities have happened in different states. Will the offenders in the state associations be punished at all?

I would classify it into two different parts. One is if somebody has done irregularity where malfeasance is involved. That needs to be investigated separately. But I’m more interested in the other part of it, that going forward, we give a system to the states and even for the BCCI that everything they do is put transparently on the website.

You’ve ordered an Operating Manual for the BCCI for internal controls and approval of expenses. Is it ready?

It is being worked on and I am expecting it will be ready by the end of May. After we have prepared it, we’ll give it to the [Supreme] Court to decide if it is to be made operational or not because we don’t want to enforce anything on our own. We are a court-appointed committee and ultimately it’s the court that will decide on all these issues.

Are any steps being taken to curtail BCCI’s legal expenses?

Well, I can't say we have taken any steps on that as yet because we haven’t had time to look into all this. The moment we got into it, the other issues overtook us – conducting the IPL, our issues with the ICC, players-related issues were there, the media contract etc. So, we’ve been engaged with those kinds of things.

On ICC’s instructions, the BCCI reluctantly merged the women’s wing with it in 2005, but has not provided equal status to women players on various counts. Even in the players’ share of 26 per cent from the BCCI, women have not been included till date. Does the CoA propose to rectify this anomaly and pay the arrears to women players?  

We are systematising that. There has been a kind of a mismatch over there. In fact, we’ve already granted players a one-time benefit and things like that. It may not be equal to what the male players are getting, but they have been granted substantially.

What are your views on players’ association, as the Lodha Committee has recommended?

That is one aspect that I have not really not looked into in the sense the advantages of having a players’ association. But I sincerely feel that every state must look up to their former players, senior players, prominent players to mentor the teams and be in some capacity advisors to the state associations. They seem to be running in total vacuum of how the game is being played. There are cricket players and cricket administrators. There is no such thing as professional cricket administrator, unless he really understands what the game is all about and, in a large number of ways, empathises with players. The whole thing is around the player itself. Isn’t it? That’s why I do think that senior players do need to take up mentoring positions with the associations.

The senior players are not encouraged to come into cricket administration.

Both ways it has happened. Lots of legendary cricketers have become recluses. Some of them have spoken up, but are not encouraged to speak up. And some who have been very outspoken there have been attempts to put them down. Commentators can always speak, but for [BCCI] employees there’s a conflict. If you are an employee of BCCI, it’s not fair to speak on air, I agree, because first you must internally resolve what you want to say. But if you are a free commentator, why not.

BCCI’s about Rs.50 crore is stuck with Karnataka development government for purchase of land for the National Cricket Academy in Bangalore.

It’s not stuck; we have taken possession of the land [near Bangalore airport]. That was the one of the first things we did. And the land is probably slightly inadequate. I have a small team working on it. And we’ve approached the Karnataka government for some more land, contiguous to it. That land is available. And in the first reference, the Karnataka government has been positive on that. I am hoping that we’ll get that land also. So, we’ll get a huge chunk, maybe 500 metres by 450 metres, and that will be good for an international quality cricket academy.

What about the Rajasthan Cricket Association’s suspension issue? In 2013, RCA elected an expelled Lalit Modi as its president the got suspended.

We haven’t got into it. There are some legal issues with Rajasthan.

Ruchir Modi recently told Outlook that the RCA has requested COA to lift the ban on it.

It has not come to my notice. It will come up in one of the meetings.

When do you foresee all the state associations finally implementing the Lodha Committee recommendations?

I don’t know and I can’t put a definitive time to it, but we are hoping by the time we of the AGM, which we hope to hold in September all the state associations would have come around. And barring one or two issues I think they will accept every other issue and they will pass it. I can’t predict about the state associations, but I would very much like the CoA to wind up in October because the AGM time for the BCCI is September. After the AGM we need to wind up because, hopefully, there will be no need for us to be there.

Is the CoA is showing some flexibility over one state one vote recommendation.

We are nobody to show any flexibility. All we did was that we asked the state associations: please tell us which of the issues in the reform package are hurting you the most. Then they came out with two-three issues. One of them was the one state, one vote, and the other was that we need to have five selectors instead of three at present. Then somebody talked of age [70-year upper limit] and cooling off etc. But these were the issues that were common among them. We have no mandate to show flexibility. COA’s mandate is: There are a set of reforms, you implement them. But in the course of implementation, if we find there is some issue, we’ll point that out to the court.

What has been your overall experience with the BCCI? Is it the same BCCI that you looked from outside? Have you as a person or as a professional gained something?

All of us are experienced administrators. I have been in public service for 40-45 years. We’ve seen all kinds of administrations; seen all kinds of people in administration. And I must say to the credit of civil service that the way we are trained, the experience that we gain, we can manage situations. It’s not a problem. I don’t think the BCCI is not that much of a challenge. It’s a democratic body like any other. People have talked to me about state associations being ‘captured’. Yes, certainly, if a state association or the BCCI has been run by somebody for the last 10 or 12 years, it’s not a good thing for the simple reason that over a decade fresh people, fresh ideas must come. And if I stay there for 10 years my vested interest or public interest get merged and I start perceiving from my point of view while I think it’s public’s point of view. I think that every five years or seven or ten years things must move on and people must change because I take it for granted that ‘look, if I move away the institution will collapse’. No, it has not happened to anybody anywhere. The institution is always bigger than the individual.

(An abridged version of this interview -- and the video -- was published in Outlook magazine, issue dated May 22, 2017. http://www.outlookindia.com/magazine/story/570-million-is-only-a-mirage/298862 )

A CRICKET SEASON’S CLOSING HURRAHS

With new heroes and old worthies, India ascended, then cemented, its No 1 status. And the hard Aussies were broken.

By Qaiser Mohammad Ali, Outlook

The Border-Gavaskar Trophy for which
India and Australia play Test match cricket.

IT was the longest cricket season ever — 13 gruelling Tests, against four rival countries. At the end of it, Team India shone like the Dhauladhar range did on the last day of the last Test in Dharamshala. India lost only one Test, and won ten. Apart from some brilliant individual performances, the two talismanic ‘K’s — Kohli and Kumble — persisted with the team’s core of young and passionately energetic players ever eager for more. They delivered a veritable bounty and vindicated India’s rank as the No. 1 Test team, and the $1 million jackpot from the ICC.

The long winter’s spell on the greens tested the character and temperament of the younger players — K.L. Rahul, Umesh Yadav, Wriddhiman Saha, Kuldeep Yadav, Ravindra Jadeja — and they repaid the faith reposed in them with performances of strong-jawed grit and loose-limbed elegance. The acme of their achievement was the sizzling come-from-behind 2-1 triumph against Australia in the four-Test series to regain the Border-Gavaskar Trophy. For the record, India have now become only the third team in Test history, after Australia (in 2004-05 and 2006-07) and South Africa

(2012-13), to win Test series against all their opponents in one season.

As expected, the series against the Aussies was the toughest. Captain Virat Kohli had said at its start that most of the Australian cricketers were his friends off the field. At the end of the bitterly-fought series, he corrected himself. “No, it has changed. I thought that was the case (that they were friends) but it has changed for sure,” he said at the press conference in Dharamshala.

India’s charged turnaround after their defeat to Australia in the first Test in Pune owes much to Kohli’s captaincy. Trailing 0-1, the team made a stunning comeback after conceding a first-innings lead in the second Test in Bangalore, won it convincingly, drew the third Test in Ranchi and went on to win the Dharamsala Test under stand-in captain Ajinkya Rahane. “One moment that defined the season was the game in Bangalore. It really pushed us to come back hard in the series, level it and then capitalise from there. That was the true test of character for all the boys,” said Kohli.

The skipper conceded that when his team blanked out England 4-0 earlier in the season, he felt it was a hard-fought series. But after confronting the well-prepared, indefatigable Australians head on, he was forced to change his assessment. This last series win helped him gain a lot of confidence as a captain, with renewed belief in his uncompromising credo — trying to win games from all situations. Kohli’s stupendous batting record in India took a beating though — he never crossed 25 in the entire series. Even then, Kohli was the second highest scorer this season — 1,252 runs with four centuries and two half-centuries in 12 Tests. He is behind Cheteshwar Pujara, who amassed 1,316 runs with four centuries, including a double, and eight half-centuries—testimony to his consistency at No. 3.

Left-arm-spinning all-rounder Jadeja and pacer Umesh Yadav came of age as the most improved players. Opener K.L. Rahul, middle order batting mainstay Rahane, and off-spinner Ashwin were the other notable performers. Noted left-arm spinner Rajinder Goel is impressed by the improvement Jadeja has shown. “He’s India’s best all-rounder at the moment, though Ashwin is also good. Jadeja now has more control over his line and length. He is a true match winner,” says Goel.

Jadeja played all 13 Tests this season, capturing 82 wickets (seven five-wicket and three 10-wicket hauls) and scored 556 runs with five half-centuries. Against Australia, he was the top wicket-taker on either side, with 25 scalps, and scored two crucial half-centuries. Importantly, his spells were curmudgeonly too—hopelessly tied down batsmen chafed under his tight control. His exploits fetched him the Man of the Series for being the most valuable player, besides the Man of the Match award in Dharamshala.

While spinners were wreckers-in-chief, Umesh raised his game many notches on pitches that were primarily turners. That didn’t deter the former college sprint champion. “I’m quite impressed the way Umesh is bowling. He is outstanding and did extremely well. I hope India gets a couple of more fast bowlers who could bowl at 145 kmph consistently and be useful abroad as well,” former India captain Dilip Vengsarkar tells Outlook.

Yadav played 12 of the 13 Tests this season and emerged as third highest wicket-taker after Ashwin and Jadeja, with 30 scalps. But that is a mere number; his never-say-die spirit was most impressive on pitches where a lesser pacer would be demoralised easily. Once thought of as a somewhat wayward bowler of raw pace more suited for shorter formats, Umesh displayed guile, discipline and an awesome staying power along with unfettered hostility.

More often than not, opener Murali Vijay provided India with a solid foundation, scoring 771 runs in 12 Tests, ahead of Rahane, who tallied 718 in 11. “I’ve been watching Rahane since his India A days and at the moment he is at the peak of his career. He has an excellent temperament and he scored crucial runs. Of course, he should be an integral part of the team for a long time to come. Also, he captained India quite admirably as losing Kohli, the best batsman in the world, was a big blow for India. Ajinkya grabbed the opportunity both as a batsman and captain,” says Vengsarkar.

But the real find was K.L. Rahul, whose languid touch-play--leaning into, not forcefully stroking, those exquisite drives along the field--recalls the natural grace of a southpaw. Rahul was amazingly consistent throughout, after staging a successful comeback from a hamstring injury he sustained during the Kanpur Test against England.

In nine Tests during the season, he scored 708 runs, including a superb 199 against England in Chennai. His six half-centuries came in seven innings, and that comprised a superb first-innings 90 in the Bangalore Test. “Rahul is very positive in his mind and is a very self-confident person. He has a lot of patience, too. He backs himself really well. After getting out in the 90s six-seven times in Ranji Trophy, he realised that he had to improve on that count,” says J. Arun Kumar, batting coach of Karnataka, who moulded Rahul.

Wicket-keeper Wriddhiman Saha was another quiet but crucial performer, though Parthiv Patel did chip in remarkably well as a substitute for three Tests after Saha got injured against England. “Saha got centuries against Bangladesh and Australia; even his 30s and 40s were crucial; they were like 70s and 80s in impact. Keeping wickets on turning pitches is an art and if you miss one catch or stumping chance your match is virtually over. Even Parthiv Patel did well when Saha got injured,” says former India wicket-keeper Kiran More.

When preparing turning tracks, the margin for error is low, and the treacherous Pune pitch—where India succumbed meekly—got righteous flak from all and sundry. A shadow lingered over the pitch in Bangalore too, where India made a grand comeback. But by the time the entourage moved to Ranchi and Dharamshala—both Test debutant venues, like Pune—the heat of battle firmly relegated the pitch issue to the background and players’ performance became the talking point.

The same band of of players will have to show overseas that their performances in the landmark 2016-17 home season were no flash in an Indian pan. Two such tours will be to Sri Lanka in July-August, which is a full series and to South Africa in January-February 2018, when India will play four Tests, besides ODIs and T20s. In May, India also travels to the West Indies, but there are no Tests scheduled. These series will make or mar some reputations. But that’s for later. Right now, the chaotic, colourful farrago of the nationality-blurring IPL promises to sweep away fans in its annual delirium.

(First published in Outlook issue, dated April 10, 2017) 

DELOITTE AUDIT REPORT EXPOSES FINANCIAL MESS IN BCCI AFFILIATES (EXCLUSIVE, Part 2 of 2)

The commissioned report exposes large scale irregularities in accounts books of the state cricket associations affiliated to the BCCI

By QAISER MOHAMMAD ALI, www.Outlookindia.com

BCCI headquarters at the Wankhede Stadium, Mumbai. 

New Delhi, March 8, 2017: The damning Deloitte audit report, which has exposed widespread financial irregularities inside the BCCI’s affiliate associations, seems to be having its desired effect.

The Supreme Court-appointed Committee of Administrators (CoA) has taken a note of the scathing report, accessed by Outlook, and is said to be mulling action after getting to know the scale of the financial irregularities mentioned in the tell-all individual reports of each state association.

A team of auditors from Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu gave the CoA, headed by former CAG Vinod Rai and comprising finance expert Vikram Limaye, MD and CEO of IDFC Ltd., a presentation a couple of weeks ago in Delhi.

Being experts at number crunching, Rai, who during his tenure as CAG had disclosed both the Coalgate and 2G Scams a few years ago, and Limaye naturally looked beyond the black-and-white text and tried reading between the lines in the Deloitte reports. They as well as their two other committee colleagues -- noted historian and never-say-die cricket fan Ramchandra Guha and former India women’s captain Diana Edulji -- felt there was still more to it that had found its way into the report.

Sources close to the CoA say what made them take the report with a pinch of salt was the auditors’ negative remarks against almost all the associations who did not cooperate with the special team constituted to undertake the first-of-its-kind, pan-India exercise. These associations essentially stonewalled their bid to dig out the truth about their financial dealings. Prominent among the units that refused to cooperate fully include Jharkhand, Orissa, Assam, Gujarat, and Goa.

In their multiple reports, the auditors have mentioned that associations either refused to show them the relevant contracts, fixed deposit receipts, documents, MoUs, bills, vouchers, receipts etc. or they were not available. They also emphasise that many associations are not maintaining the fixed assets register – mandatory for every big organisation – or wrote accounts books with a pencil or accepted bills presented on plain paper or favoured their known ones in tender process. In several instances, the auditors noted the differences in the amounts of money that the BCCI has given associations and what they claim to have received.

For example, the auditors point out the bizarre act of overruling duly audited accounts by the Gujarat Cricket Association. “The audited financial statements duly signed by office-bearers was superseded subsequently with a correct version due to an inadvertent error in the balance sheet resulting in certain differences in the older version.”

It is learned that even as the CoA studies the report, it is not entirely happy with what it has in its hands. Considering the associations’ instances of defiance mentioned above, there is thinking among some members of the committee, that it would be prudent to conduct a fresh audit of the state associations.

While the other CoA members are not speaking to the media, Guha made an exception to make a general comment on the Deloitte report. “We have seen the report. A presentation has been made to us by Deloitte. There are multiple reports. We are aware of the situation and we will try and do the best we can,” Guha tells Outlook, stressing that he too has taken a decision to not to speak on his committee’s decisions.

If the CoA members, who are in no hurry to implement the reforms as they would like to do a good job of the responsibility given, eventually decide to order a fresh audit of the associations, they would have a solid, valid reason. In this context, it is crucial to note that former BCCI president Shashank Manohar’s order of the audit in October 2015 was his own initiative – and that is what the CoA may also point out.

There was no order from any court to do so, though at the time the BCCI was under the Supreme Court hammer and had coping with the public wrath for its mismanagement, particularly in financial matters. Manohar wanted to cleanse the opaque system. Under the circumstances, it was perhaps the best step that he could take in his bid to make the state officials transparent and accountable, and restore the BCCI’s image somewhat.

But Manohar then left the BCCI and became ICC chairman. The circumstances changed quickly, and soon the Supreme Court debarred president Anurag Thakur, who had since replaced Manohar, and secretary Ajay Shirke in January. While the BCCI’s entire focus was now on saving its own skin in the Supreme Court, there was no one to take action on the Deloitte report.

Therefore, it is only natural for the CoA to study the report and probably take action. It is important to note that his committee has the mandate of the Supreme Court to govern until the Lodha Committee recommendations are implemented in the BCCI and its affiliates, followed by elections. Thus, it has enough powers and it has taken complete command of the Board, as seen in its several directives to the state associations, including seeking information on their qualified/disqualified administrators.

Since the committee derives its strength from the highest court of the country, it thus has the power to order a fresh audit. Its present priority, however, will obviously be to ensure that the ongoing Test series with Australia is conducted smoothly – and there’s no repeat of the Pune pitch fiasco – and the high-stake IPL in April-May.

 During all this, the committee is taking a hard look at Deloitte report and may take a decision on whether it should go for a re-audit, say sources. After all, the reforms will start from the state associations, which are members as well as the electorate of the BCCI. If the administration in states is not in order, transparent, and implement the Lodha Committee-drafted constitution reforms can’t take place in true sense.

“It [contents of the audit report] may be just the tip of the iceberg. Maybe a lot of the material that’s really relevant was not divulged to the Deloitte audit team. There may a good chance that re-audit may be ordered. That it would be in order. A lot of people have been asking for it,” said the source aware of the developments. “After all, Vinod Rai is an expert in this field – auditing. If he feels there are loopholes somewhere or some other things need to be probed he may ask for it.” And, as seen by Outlook, there are indeed many grey areas stressed in the Deloitte reports.

One of the root causes of the state associations’ ‘I-don’t-give-a-damn’ attitude towards financial matters, including maintenance of account books, is that the BCCI never tried to make them accountable for the huge grants/funds they have been doling out year after year (see the graphic alongside), particularly since the advent of the lucrative IPL in 2008. All this is due to the Board’s vote politics and a majority of former office-bearers’ keenness to perpetuate their reins. This, despite giving huge amounts to its affiliates over the years.

It was only after the Supreme Court took a tough stand over this issue and asked the BCCI to furnish details of the money it had distributed to the states and how the states have spent it that the Board asked the associations to get the audit done on their own (the Deloitte audit was ordered separately). Earlier, a majority of officials in the associations had been splurging the money the way they wanted, many times on themselves, as is enumerated by the Deloitte report.

While trying to impress upon the Supreme Court that the BCCI had been taking a tough stand against its affiliates vis-à-vis financial accountability, former BCCI secretary Anurag Thakur in a sworn affidavit, submitted in May 2016, actually ended up admitting that some states had not been getting their accounts audited. In his affidavit, he cited the Gujarat Cricket Association (GCA), headed by BJP president Amit Shah, as an example.

“If not submitted, the disbursement is withheld until such submission. For example, disbursements to the GCA were withheld in FY 2011-12 and FY 2012-13 due to non-submission of audited accounts. However, once it submitted is (sic) audited accounts, Rs.86.66 crore (being its aggregate entitlement for FY 2011-12, FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-14) was disbursed to it in FY 2013-14,” said Thakur. However, Gujarat alone is not guilty; there are many of its ilk that get away with murder, so to say.

Despite the Supreme Court and the CoA wielding the stick, some officials and associations are still trying their best to impede the impending reforms by taking legal recourse. Many of them have moved applications in the Supreme Court, basically on two issues: the supposed confusion over administrators’ tenure (whether it is nine years each at the BCCI and the states, or nine years altogether), and the fear that ICC chairman Manohar’s bid to treat all member countries at par would significantly reduce BCCI’s share from the ICC. The next hearing in the Supreme Court is on March 27.

Those in favour of reforms charge that certain officials’ worry over likely reduced share from ICC is a “put on” act and is actually a bid to prolong their rule by taking attention away from the main issue – reforms in Indian cricket.

“BCCI officials keep saying that if the ICC pays India less, players would suffer. But most people don’t know – not even the players, perhaps – that not even a penny that comes from the ICC is shared with players. So whether or not BCCI gets more money or less from the ICC, it would make no difference to players,” said an official.

“For example, when the Champions League Twenty20 tournament was discontinued in 2015 the BCCI received a compensation of Rs.1,607.58 crore from the broadcasters STAR Sports. Not a penny of this money was shared with players. Both the public and players have to understand all these things,” he pointed out. “Why doesn’t the BCCI include the income from the IPL and ICC’s distribution as part of the 26 per cent of the gross revenue that it shares with players?”

Currently, the 26 per cent players’ share only includes income from media/TV rights and jersey logo deal.

This ICC issue is closely linked with the reforms in the BCCI and its affiliates. The ICC is expected to take a final decision in April, but the implementation of reforms in India may take many more months, going by the pace at which this Supreme Court case has been progressing and the state associations trying to take legal recourse to, as many experts allege, delay implementing the Lodha Committee’s recommendations. Until these cases get disposed of quickly, uncertainty will continue to affect Indian cricket.

Below are some of highlights of the Deloitte Audit Report (the figures against the state associations’ names, in parenthesis, are the amounts they received from BCCI between 2010-11 and 2014-15, as per a BCCI affidavit submitted in Supreme Court):

Baroda (Rs.154.92 crore)

n Land at Kotambi purchased for Rs.13.95 crore from seller who himself purchased the property just a month before for Rs.10.95 crore.

n Advance of Rs.4.17 crore paid for buying land at Sarkarda at risk; litigation is on.

n Memorabilia worth Rs.96 lakhs in silver coins issued to all 2,300 members.

Uttar Pradesh (Rs.123.52 crore)

n Rs. 21.52 crore, including Rs.3 crore for proposed building, spent in acquiring land in Unnao, near Kanpur, for a stadium. Now, UPCA plans to sell it.

n UPCA took Green Park Stadium on a 30-year lease at a yearly rent of Rs.1 crore, but the state government too is using it.

n No practice of inviting open tenders, awarding purchase/service contracts.

Haryana (Rs.120.65 crore)

n Close to its Lahli stadium, 21.06 acres land bought for Rs.10.74 crore (@ Rs.51.01 lakh/acre while in 2013-14 the collector rate was Rs.25 lakh/acre) between 2010-2014 for another stadium.

n Land in Sultanpur, Yakubpur, Sondhi and Beed in Haryana purchased at a premium of 50%-230% over collector rates and exchanged with Reliance Haryana SEZ’s 9.84-acre land in Lohat.

Jharkhand (Rs.196.23 crore)

n Non-refundable Rs.15.85 crore premium paid for leasehold land in Ranchi not being amortized over the lease period.

n Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited sub-leased 31.70 acres land in Ranchi to JSCA for a stadium for a Rs.15.85 crore premium. HECL now wants to evict JSCA as it wants to build a star hotel inside the stadium; litigation on.

Kerala (Rs.176.16 crore)

n Rs.27.08 crore spent on purchasing 23.65-acre marshy mangrove land in Edakochi in 2009-10 for building a stadium. Case is in the High Court.

n Rs.3.36 crore spent on purchasing land in Thodupuzha. It’s under litigation.

n Rs.85 lakh paid to United Kingdom’s architectural firm Hopkins without formal agreement.

Orissa (Rs.186.64 crore)

n Rs.2.38 crore loss to OCA Club since its inception in 2013-14.

n Rs.3.5 lakh worth of 70 tonnes organic manure purchased every month from Indian Plant Seeds for Barabati Stadium/gardens, no utilisation records maintained.

n Rs.5.41 crore deficit in organising men’s and women’s tournaments, despite reimbursements by the BCCI.

Hyderabad (Rs.156.67 crore)

n At least Rs.114.95 crore worth of financial irregularities from 2000-2012 alleged by Anti Corrpution Bureau.

n Rs.2.03 crore demand from the electricity department for electricity theft.

n Land in Mehboobnagar and Nizamabad purchased for Rs.1.51 crore for constructing stadiums, but IT Dept attached them in 2015-16 for not paying tax.

Goa (Rs.141.30 crore)

n Fixed assets, including a ground at Sanguem, capitalised at Rs 6.2 crore, mired in controversy.

n Alleged misappropriation of Rs.2.87 crore received from BCCI between 2006-2008.

n Rs.4.47 crore paid to Uday Joshi & Asso on design & consultancy; work not shown to auditors.

n Officials spent Rs.43 lakh on watching IPL games in 2014-15 under ‘Cricket Promotion Expenses’.

Gujarat (Rs.157.23 crore)

n GCA purchased cricket balls (Rs.42.45 lakh) and staff uniform (Rs.1.73 lakh) from two firms in which officials were “interested” in (2012-13 to 2015-16).

n Audited financial statements for 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 not provided and AGMs not held. Office-bearers’ term had expired in 2011-12.

n Significant IT demand of Rs.37 crore from 2006-07 to 2012-13.

Himachal Pradesh (Rs.134.28 crore)

n HPCA, a society, changed to a company on Oct 1, 2012, but it had registered a company with exactly same acronym (Himalayan Players Cricket Asso) was incorporated in 2005. After becoming a company, HPCA became Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association.

n Total tax demand of Rs.18 crore pending, but no provision or entry is made in the books.

Saurashtra (Rs.158.89 crore)

n Transactions with association members and their family: Rs.84,000 ex-gratia, Rs.66,000 for mobile phone, Rs.85,000 for mobile bill for 2014-15 and car along with petrol expenses amounting to Rs.14 lakh given to secretary Niranjan Shah.

 

Assam (Rs.216.15 crore)

n Contract for Barsapara Stadium floodlights given for Rs.9.87 crore; actual cost was Rs.12 crore. It got a Rs.6.50 crore loan @ 9.25% against two fixed deposits (maturity value Rs.8.47 crore) for paying Service Tax (Rs.3.30 crore) and contractors (Rs.3.20 crore).

Bengal (Rs.224.18 crore)

n Non-payment of Eden Gardens lease rentals for four years is Rs.3.24 crore while Rs.66 lakh was spent on celebration of 199th Test of Sachin Tendulkar in 2013-14 and Rs.58 lakh on 150th anniversary of the stadium.

Tamil Nadu (Rs.193.42 crore)

n Lease of Chennai’s Chepauk Stadium pending renewal, after the 20-year lease expired on April 19, 2015. Additional lease rental demand of Rs.28.99 crore received by the TNCA for Chepauk. Three stands (12,000 seats) of Chepauk sealed for being constructed without CMDA’s permission.

Mumbai (Rs.191.57 crore)

n 19 Corporate Boxes at Wankhede Stadium, Mumbai, allotted without tender process. MCA offers subsidised tickets to Garware Club House, which can charge their members extra. Rs.1 crore donated to Mahrashtra CM’s drought relief fund, though there’s no such provision in its bye-laws.

Maharashtra (Rs.183.89 crore)

n Rs.64 lakh spent on guard dog services and Rs.26 lakh to contractors for house-keeping services without tenders/evaluation. 
n No written contracts defining roles for 30 contractors/consultants and 12 employees.

Karnataka (Rs.183.57 crore)

n Rs.2.03 crore incurred on software not in use. It includes the ERP/cricketing software/cognitive e-play software. 
n Association spent Rs.1.21 crore for telecasting Platinum Jubilee celebrations.

Punjab (Rs.178.14 crore)

n Fixed deposits of Rs.15 crore in the name of president and treasurer. 
n Punjab and Chandigarh police’s bill of Rs.31.64 crore is being contested. 
n Post facto approval of Rs.1 crore paid to Punjab State Cancer and Drug Addiction Treatment Infra Fund.

Delhi (Rs.163.60 crore)

n DDCA’s most controversial project is Ferozeshah Kotla Stadium’s renovation. The initial contract was of Rs.24 crore in 2004, but cost has escalated to approx. Rs.141 crore without the stadium being complete, still.

Madhya Pradesh (Rs.158.08 crore)

n Purchase of 12.43 hectares of land at various rates, ranging from Rs.30 lakh to Rs.2 crore per hectare.

n Income Tax has imposed Rs.490 lakh penalty. 
n Rs.18.44 lakh spent on 100th birthday celebrations of late cricketers CS Nayudu, MM Jagdale and Syed Mushtaq Ali.

Vidarbha (Rs.150.25 crore)

n VCA Club House has made a loss of Rs.5.82 crore in the last three years. 
n Significant amount of off balance-sheet exposures (service tax and police bandobast): Rs. 21.48 crore on March 31, 2015.

Tripura (Rs.106.01 crore)

n Contrary to its bye-laws, Rs.148.37 crore kept in fixed deposits with state co-operative and gramin banks. 
n The association paid, under protest, only Rs.2.61 crore out of Rs.7.11 crore Income Tax demand in 2012-13.

Rajasthan (Rs.118.67 crore)

n An ad-hoc body is managing the RCA affairs after suspending the body for electing suspended Lalit Modi its president on May 6, 2014. Since then cricketers have been most hit while BCCI has stopped funds.

Andhra (Rs.139.83 crore)

n Spent Rs.3.06 crore on its Diamond Jubilee Celebrations in 2014 while 100 silver mementos worth Rs.27 lakh distributed without receipt information. 
n NGT imposed Rs.96.40 lakh fine for cutting trees.

Jammu and Kashmir (Rs.36.83 crore)

n Some former J&KCA office-bearers facing inquiry for alleged misappropriation of Rs.24.64 crore (A PIL filed in the state has put the figure at around Rs.40 crore). A case is on in the High Court.

n Currently, the state sports minister heads J&KCA, defying Lodha panel’s recommendations.

Chhatisgarh (Rs.10.01 crore)

Railways (Rs.5.52 crore)

Services (Rs.4.92 crore)

Meghalaya (Rs.2.52 crore)

Cricket Club of India (Rs.2.11 crore)

Sikkim (Rs.0.62 crore)

Nagaland (Rs.0.04 crore)

Manipur (Rs.0.02 crore)

Source: Deloitte Audit Report and a BCCI affidavit in Supreme Court. Bihar, National Cricket Club, and Arunachal Pradesh did not receive funds from 2010-11 to 2014-15, as per the BCCI affidavit.