Indian sports administrators: Conflict of interest

Conflict-of-interest more widespread, deep-rooted than fixing in Indian sports

By Qaiser Mohammad Ali

Indo-Asian News Service (IANS)

New Delhi, June 6 (IANS) Turning to senior lawyer Kapil Sibal, who was representing then Indian cricket board president N. Srinivasan, Chief Justice of India T.S. Thakur said bias in a conflict of interest situation happens in a "subtle way".
 
Thakur said that on December 8, 2014, while hearing the 2013 IPL betting-fixing scandal in which Srinivasan, whose son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan and others were central figures, was battling to come out of the conflicted zone.
 
Thakur had made the "subtle way" comment specifically when Srinivasan was trying to constitute a committee to probe the IPL betting-fixing scandal. Some members of that committee were also conflicted and the panel was eventually not accepted by the Supreme Court.
 
Separately, as secretary and later president of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), Srinivasan would attend Indian Premier League (IPL) governing council meetings, and was thus aware of the decisions the BCCI was taking. It's difficult to believe that he never shared the discussions, or decisions taken, within the BCCI with his own IPL franchise, Chennai Super Kings (CSK), and did not take undue advantage of that.
 
More than six years later, Srinivasan's daughter, Rupa, finds herself in a similar situation -- in the conflict-of-interest zone. The person who spotted her there is a retired Supreme Court judge, D.K. Jain. He pronounced his judgment as the BCCI Ethics Officer on June 3.
 
Rupa Gurunath was elected TNCA president, succeeding her father, in September 2019. Her husband, Gurunath Meiyappan, had already been banned for life by the Supreme Court for his role in the same 2013 IPL betting-fixing scandal. Rupa holds two posts -- of TNCA president and a Whole Time Director of India Cements Limited (ICL), which runs the Chennai Super Kings Cricket Ltd (CSKCL) that owns IPL franchise CSK.
 
These two are high profile cases that have caught the eye. In reality, there are any number of conflicted persons at lower levels whose unethical deeds never come to light, they do it in such a "subtle way". Usually, powerful people back these conflicted persons. These powerful persons are mostly politicians and businessmen spread across sports in India.
 
So, that brings us to the question: Who has harmed cricket -- or sports, in general -- the most in India? Many people would say that it is the people involved in match-fixing/betting.
 
However, I feel the conflict of interest is the biggest curse and misfortunate of Indian cricket, rather Indian sports. Match-fixing is probably not as deep rooted and as widespread as the conflict of interest, if closely seen across all sports, not just cricket, played in the country. The conflict of interest is everywhere; only the degree to which it influences varies. Sometimes it is blatant, as the Supreme Court and one of its judges (Jain) saw in the cases of Srinivasan and Rupa, respectively. At other times, it happens in a "subtle way".
 
Match-fixing may not be found in all competitive sports. But the conflict of interest is present across the spectrum; no Indian sport can claim it is not influenced by the conflicted people. Be it election of sports bodies or selection of athletes/teams, the conflict of interest is found everywhere -- in different forms at different levels.
 
Most of the conflicted persons are sports administrators, selectors, or coaches. If their brothers/sisters/sons/daughters/nephews/nieces are also playing cricket -- or any other sport -- in which their elders hold positions, the conflict-of-interest becomes obvious and blatant. It will be rare to find selectors, sports administrators, coaches clear of the conflict.
 
The conflict of interest is not restricted to selection of the "near and dear ones" by their fathers and uncles. It plays with full gusto while awarding contracts of constructing stadiums, laying of astro turfs/athletic tracks, athletes' clothing, sponsorship, supply of food during competitions, erecting tents, etc. The list is so long and varied that the mind boggles.
 
The conflict of interest is more widespread and blatant in cricket because there is more money to be made from it than in any other sport in India. The case of certain officials of the BCCI and its affiliated state associations, particularly the TNCA, is a case in point.
 
In cricket, sponsors pay more money, the requirements for the BCCI-organised tournaments are much bigger than the other sports. So, obviously more people come into the conflict zone as they often award these contracts and rights to their known ones, many times without following the laid down process of tender etc. The Delhi and District Cricket Association is notorious in this regard and leads the way.
 
Also, retired cricketers open academies in their names and then when confronted they claim they don't benefit from the fee that trainees pay. They insist they are run by their mothers, fathers, or brothers, as the case may be, saying they only lend their names. Many of these cricketers also sit in selection committees and become coaches. Would you believe them that they never influence selection of players, either blatantly or in a "subtle way", particularly if their sons and nephews are in contention? Impossible.
 
So, it should not have taken more than five months, since the time the complaint was filed, for the BCCI Ethics Officer to declare that TNCA president Rupa Gurunath was indeed in the conflicted zone. The conflict was so obvious.
 
Interestingly, the BCCI did not respond to the notice of Justice DK Jain. The reason is not far to seek: Srinivasan's is one of the four groups that had formed the coalition in October 2019 to come to power without having to fight an election.
 
They at all costs wanted to get rid of the Vinod Rai-headed Committee of Administrators, appointed by the Supreme Court, that had been running the BCCI for around 33 months, following the 2013 IPL betting-fixing scandal.
 
The bright side of all this is that at least the BCCI has an Ombudsman, though he at times is rendered powerless. Some sports federations might also have appointed Ombudsman. But have you heard any of them delivering judgments of the same magnitude as delivered as in the case of Rupa Gurunath? Or, any judgment at all.
 
"Purity of the game has to be maintained at any cost. Persons at the helm of affairs should be above suspicion. We are thinking in the larger interest of the game. There should be no chance for people to point fingers at those who are running the show," the TS Thakur-headed Supreme Court bench, also comprising FMI Kalifulla, had said in December 2014 while hearing the IPL scandal.
 
The already side-lined Srinivasan, whose son-in-law Meiyappan was in sharp focus in the IPL scandal, had offered to keep away from the BCCI-initiated probe involving Meiyappan and others.
 
The bench countered that by asking Srinivasan's counsel Sibal: "You [Srinivasan] say even if elected you will stay away from decision making against those found guilty. But the question is even then can the decision of BCCI be seen as a fair decision? Will not he be exercising his influence in some way or other? Bias in such situation happens in a subtle way."
 
(This story was first published by IANS on June 6, 2021)

Indian administrators must change mind-set towards women's cricket

By Qaiser Mohammad Ali

(Indo-Asian News Service)

New Delhi, May 30 (IANS) In 2012, the Indian Sports Ministry asked all the national sports federations (NSFs) to make provision for "at least 10 per cent of its total membership" to women, besides the 25 per cent membership and voting rights it envisaged for the government-nominated athletes on the executive committees of the NSFs.

But the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) would have none of it -- it can only afford to snub the sports ministry, like it did.
 
In a 39-page, strongly-worded reply to the Ministry, the BCCI straightaway rejected the instructions.
 
"Cricket for women is no doubt conducted under the aegis of the BCCI, but (it) has never attracted even a fraction of the popularity associated with the men's team," it wrote.
 
"Our members would never accept such an illegal imposition of women having membership and voting rights over cricketing matters concerning the men's team. In fact, this provision is downright absurd as far as the BCCI is concerned. The end result of these changes would dilute the voting rights of the existing members by 35 per cent (25+10 per cent) and that is reason enough to drop these provisions," the Board added.
 
Needless to say, the BCCI never implemented the Ministry's instructions -- and got away scot-free.
 
Here's another example. Just a few years ago, when I asked a former president of the Indian cricket board during a formal interview about the lack of facilities for Indian women cricketers, he chose to go "off the record" and poured out, what I felt, were his true feelings for women cricketers.
 
What he told me "off the record" was candid as well as disconcerting. More importantly, his "off the record" reply gave a peep into the mind-set of Indian cricket administrators vis-a-vis women cricketers.
 
"See, the Indian (male) players are getting the facilities after several decades; the women's wing wanted this within two years," he stated, off the record.
 
"They want to be treated on the same lines as (Mahendra Singh) Dhoni and (Sachin) Tendulkar. Within bounds and reasons, they have been given all -- they have been holding camps, using the NCA (National Cricket Academy). They want to tour; they are allowed. We cannot duplicate the men's wing for them. The men's wing got it after many years after delivering so much on the field. Please understand that," he said.
 
The reply came as a revelation of the mentality of the BCCI -- of what they think about women cricketers.
 
As a disclaimer, let me point out that this is not to belittle the superb achievements of the men's team over the years and decades, nor am I trying to make a case that women cricketers should immediately - and at all costs -- be given all that their male counterparts are receiving.
 
The point here is that the BCCI is rich enough to narrow the vast gap between the wages of the two genders -- provided the thinking of its administrators changes, if it hasn't so far, since the former president gave me a peep into his mind.
 
The BCCI's 2018-19 balance sheet showed that it was worth a colossal Rs 14,489.80 crore. Obviously, there is no dearth of money; it has to be the mind-set, which must change.
 
As the Indian women's team is set to embark on a tour of England in a few days, not much may have changed within the BCCI with regard to women cricketers. A sample of this can be had from the vast disparity in the annual retainership for male and female players announced recently.
 
The annual retainership/contract for players is just the latest example of the huge gulf between the pay scale of the male and female cricketers. A male cricketer in the A+ Grade receives Rs 7 crore, those in the A bracket get Rs 5 crore, cricketers in the B category receive Rs 3 crore, and cricketers in the C Grade get Rs 1 crore annually.
 
For women, there are only three grades, and the retainership amounts are Rs 50 lakh, Rs 30 lakh, and Rs 10 lakh. Yes, you read it right - Rs 50 lakh, Rs 30 lakh, and Rs 10 lakh.
 
The total amount the BCCI has earmarked for the 28 male cricketers for the 2020-21 annual retainership is Rs 96 crore, while the corresponding grand total for the 19 contracted women cricketers is a mere Rs 5.10 crore -- a colossal difference of Rs 90.90 crore.
 
Similarly, there is a huge gulf in the match fees of Indian male and female cricketers.
 
Also, the women's teams play much less international matches than the men's team - therefore, much less income in terms of match fee. Imagine, the Indian women's team last played a Test match in 2014. They will now play one in England.
 
Those who try to defend the vast disparity in payment often argue that women players don't attract revenue via sponsorship and other endorsements, so they deserve less pay.
 
My counter is: Did the BCCI over the years and decades try to take women players (and administrators of the national women's cricket body when they were a separate entity until 2006) into confidence and market their game along with men's? Did they treat female cricketers at par with their male counterparts in many other respects? The answer is: No.
 
Had the BCCI administrators over the decades honestly planned about the betterment of the women's game, they could have bundled the sponsorship deals, combining men's and women's cricket. That never happened.
 
The hard truth is that the BCCI extremely reluctantly merged the national women's body, which was an independent body until 2006. The BCCI was one of the last national men's boards to merge the women's wing on the instructions of the International Cricket Council.
 
And then people with a certain mind-set have been ruling the BCCI since. Evidently, there are different yardsticks for men's and women's game.
 
Indian women cricketers, present and past, saw a ray of hope when Sourav Ganguly was elected BCCI president in October 2019. Former India captain Shanta Ramgaswamy was among those who saw light at the end of the tunnel.
 
"As Sourav is there as BCCI president and when he says that he wants to do something for first-class cricketers, I suppose he includes women players also. So, that's a good sign. Hopefully, half of our work will be done. What we need to do, he himself is proposing. If it happens, it will be a shot in the arm for all women cricketers who slogged all their lives to help sustain this game," Ramgaswamy, who is now in the BCCI apex council as a representative of the Indian Cricketers' Association, had told me after the 2019 BCCI elections.
 
Alas, not much has happened since October 2019. Probably Ganguly alone can't do anything without his colleagues changing their mind-set vis-a-vis Indian women's cricket.
 
(First published in Indo-Asian News Service)

As Bishan Bedi recovers from illness, granddaughter makes him smile

By Qaiser Mohammad Ali ( IANS)

New Delhi, March 24 (IANS) Cricket legend Bishan Singh Bedi always had a firm grip and control over the ball while bowling his flighted left-arm spinners. The only difference these days is that he holds not one but two balls in his hands at the same time on medical advice. Instead of the leather, these are rubber balls meant to stimulate muscles after his recent multiple operations. And when his granddaughter throws the same fluorescent coloured balls in the air, Bedi's eyes light up and brings a smile to his face, even as he advises her: "catch it, catch it".

Six-year-old Suhavi, daughter of Bedi's daughter, is clearly the lifeline of the 74-year-old former India captain. So, when the ponytailed Suhavi throws the same green and orange fluorescent coloured balls high up in the air and tries to catch them, Bedi breaks into a genuine smile. And the shouts of "catch it, catch it" come out naturally and instinctively.

It is evening time and Bedi, along with wife Anju, daughter Neha, and her husband Gautam -- besides the two male nurses -- are sitting in the large lawn at the back of 'Cricket Abode', the name of his sprawling spacious south Delhi farm house. Neha affectionately makes her father drink something from a cup and eat a couple of cookies. Although Bedi is not too interested, he gives in to his daughter's pleading.

Although Bedi is temporarily moving in a wheelchair as he recovers from a recent open heart surgery and its after-effects, his indomitable will hasn't dimmed one bit, much like the courage he showed while flighting the ball to flummox batsmen and spell their doom. All his faculties are alert, coherent, and functioning well. This became evident when he warned one of the male nurses to not annoy one of his pet dogs.

Besides being fond of dogs -- in mid-1990s there were a dozen, now there are only four left -- Bedi "likes" wearing T-shirts and shorts at home, say his family members. Little wonder therefore that even these days he wears the same attire, with the unmistakable logo of 'Bishan Singh Bedi Coaching Trust', which he found around 30 years ago, displayed on his T-shirt and the shorts he is wearing.

Bedi speaks less these days due to weakness -- only bubbly Suhavi brings out a smile from him and the odd shouts of "catch it" -- but he minutely observes everything. He was quick to praise the green-and-black checked shirt of a visitor: "Very good check". Like a perfect host, he quickly asks Neha to make tea and snacks for the guest, and tray duly arrives in no time. Talking of cookies, the affable Anju informs that her husband particularly likes cookies with embellishments on top.

Now, Suhavi, the cynosure of all eyes, changes track as her father Gautam, husband of Neha, brings out a plastic golf set. Several plastic balls are placed on the spiral, Suhavi hits them one by one to a plastic hole above the ground that her father holds a few metres away.

Bedi also grows crops at the back of his farmhouse. Since the surroundings are thick with trees, stray peacocks venture into the cricketer's backyard. Suhavi suddenly leaves golf set and chases one of the peacocks, even makes a sound similar to that of a peacock. All this keeps everyone in the family, particularly Bedi, engaged and glued.

The only missing family members are Bedi's actor son Angad and his well-known actress wife, also named Neha. Lo and behold, Angad from Mumbai makes a video-call on her mother's mobile even as Bedi was engaged in a chat. Anju asks daughter Neha to hold phone to her father so that he could speak to him. When Angad asked "how are you?", Bedi answered with a question: "how are YOU?" Angad, a Bollywood actor, was attending his father in Delhi, but had gone back to Mumbai for some work. But like a faithful son, he remains in constant touch with his father on phone on a daily basis, and keeps visiting his father every now and then, along with his wife Neha, also an actor.

Interestingly, now since there are two Nehas in the Bedi family, how do the family members distinguish between the two when both are present. If anyone thought there would be confusion when someone calls either Bedi's daughter or the daughter-in-law, Anju says the issue is easily resolved by following a tradition in the Sikh families.

"In our households, even the elderly don't call the bride by name. They address them by saying 'wife of so and so'. So, when both Nehas are at home, I call them in the similar way," says the articulate Mrs Bedi, who shifted from Kanpur to Delhi in 1980 after her marriage.

All this while, the fluorescent rubber balls are at play, either in the hands of Bedi, who had a paralytic attack too, or of Suhavi. Pressing these balls stimulate muscles, explains Dr Natottam Puri, an old friend of Bedi. "There are several ways of doing physiotherapy, and this is one of those. When the hands press the rubber ball, it stimulates muscles and gets rid of muscle atrophy," says the well-known doctor-turned-cricket-commentator. Then Puri pays a huge compliment to his friend of several decades, referring to Bedi's never-say-die spirit: "There's a fast bowler's heart in a spinner's body." Time has passed quickly, and the sun is about to set. Bedi has been sitting in the wheelchair for long, and he is now feeling tired. "Can I go inside now, please?" he politely asks his wife. Everyone agrees. "Would you like to take a walk?" Anju and Neha ask him. But Bedi is not too interested. So, Gautam pushes his chair inside. Suhavi too goes inside, after chasing the peacocks. The rest of the family members and the two nurses also walk inside the covered area of the vast 'Cricket Abode', far from the madding crowd of Delhi.

(This story was first published by Indo-Asian News Service)