SERVICES
CRICKET CHALLENGES
Background
Based on Lodha Committee recommendations for cleaning up cricket
administration in India, the Supreme Court, in Oct 2016, had ordered a
reduction of 'full members' of BCCI (with privileges such as voting rights) to
one per state. Maharashtra and Gujrat that had previously had three
associations each would have to be content with one each. The long standing memberships
of Railways, Services and Indian Universities were also suspended.
Now in its recent modified order of 09 Aug 2018, the Supreme Court has restored full memberships for Maharashtra, Mumbai, Vidarbha, Gujarat, Baroda and Saurashtra. The court has also restored full membership with voting rights for the three non-state bodies (Railways, Services and Combined Universities).
Consequent to the modified order of the Supreme Court, BCCI has come out with its Memorandum of Association And Rules and Regulations dated 21 Aug 18.
A top level study risks missing out on details of implementation. Conflicts are likely to surface only when attempts are made to follow orders. Despite one review and a modified order by the honourable Supreme Court, there are implementation glitches in respect of the non-state associations. Here, I intend to take a brief look at only the issues related to Services Sports Control Board and former Services cricketers.
Now in its recent modified order of 09 Aug 2018, the Supreme Court has restored full memberships for Maharashtra, Mumbai, Vidarbha, Gujarat, Baroda and Saurashtra. The court has also restored full membership with voting rights for the three non-state bodies (Railways, Services and Combined Universities).
Consequent to the modified order of the Supreme Court, BCCI has come out with its Memorandum of Association And Rules and Regulations dated 21 Aug 18.
A top level study risks missing out on details of implementation. Conflicts are likely to surface only when attempts are made to follow orders. Despite one review and a modified order by the honourable Supreme Court, there are implementation glitches in respect of the non-state associations. Here, I intend to take a brief look at only the issues related to Services Sports Control Board and former Services cricketers.
The
Effect of Current Rules on SSCB/ Services Cricket
Services Cricket is controlled and managed by Services Sports Control
Board (SSCB), which is a joint services (Army, Navy, and Air Force)
organisation. SSCB carries out the responsibility of promotion, development and
conduct of sports (cricket is one of these) within the armed forces as one of
their objectives. This eventually leads to Armed forces participation in sports
activities at the national level.
SSCB has been a Full Member of BCCI for long.
The Secretary has traditionally represented SSCB carrying one vote on
its behalf in BCCI General Body meetings.
The new rules require that SSCB representative shall be a former
cricketer elected by the association of former cricketers and not one nominated
by the govt or SSCB.
The secretary SSCB, who bears responsibility for the conduct of sports
and creation and maintenance of facilities within the Services, has hitherto
represented SSCB in the BCCI. As former players do not bear any of this
responsibility, the representation by a former player, elected by the
association of former players, will only serve the interests of former players and
not of the game within Services.
A Perception:
SSCB’S Lack of Focus on Cricket and Former Players
Services Sports Control Board is an all sports board unlike a state
cricket association. SSCB secretaries have a handsome sports background but often
not related to cricket. As such, SSCB secretaries are likely to be more
interested in administrative/ political issues instead of cricketing matters when
they represent Services in the BCCI.
Services cricketers usually leave armed forces early in search of
stability and avenues related to their cricketing experience. SSCB deals with
serving personnel and has little to do with the retired. Former Services
cricketers have been a disappointed lot with little or no support from SSCB to
promote their cause with BCCI for coaching, umpiring/ referee and managerial
assignments.
SSCB has had an organisational strength and character unmatched by most contemporaries. Leadership typical to armed forces has been amply displayed in sports as well. Administrators from the SSCB have demonstrated integrity besides undisputed managerial ability to perform roles that came their way. Former cricketers or not, they never compromised with the objectives of development and promotion of cricket.
The country would remember the leadership example in 1981 Melbourne Test, where the India Team manager Wg Cdr SK Durani sent back Chauhan to continue despite an agitated Gavaskar walking his team out. Gavaskar would be ever grateful to the Wing Commander for getting him out of an extremely embarrassing situation. Wg Cdr Durani, the then SSCB Secretary was a hockey player and an able administrator. There are more examples of SSCB Secretaries doing a great job as the India Team managers.
Most of former Services players are retired. Justifiably, they have no role to play in the governance of cricket within Services.
In contrast, most former state players belong to the state and continue to have links with the state associations.
The BCCI rule does not ask for a Former Players’ Association in every state perhaps because their state associations are bodies where office bearers and representatives are elected through elections.
However, it asks for the establishment of a Former Services Players’ Association. The thing to consider is that the former players association cannot fulfil the obligations of providing grounds and administrative facilities for BCCI commitments.
It is easy to imagine how the rest will unfold. An elected representative of former Services players representing SSCB will have no authority or responsibility towards furthering Services cricket and he will be in a position to derive individual privileges in return of one vote.
Strengths
of SSCB
SSCB has had an organisational strength and character unmatched by most contemporaries. Leadership typical to armed forces has been amply displayed in sports as well. Administrators from the SSCB have demonstrated integrity besides undisputed managerial ability to perform roles that came their way. Former cricketers or not, they never compromised with the objectives of development and promotion of cricket.
The country would remember the leadership example in 1981 Melbourne Test, where the India Team manager Wg Cdr SK Durani sent back Chauhan to continue despite an agitated Gavaskar walking his team out. Gavaskar would be ever grateful to the Wing Commander for getting him out of an extremely embarrassing situation. Wg Cdr Durani, the then SSCB Secretary was a hockey player and an able administrator. There are more examples of SSCB Secretaries doing a great job as the India Team managers.
Services
Cricket Concerns: A Comparison with States
Most of former Services players are retired. Justifiably, they have no role to play in the governance of cricket within Services.
In contrast, most former state players belong to the state and continue to have links with the state associations.
The BCCI rule does not ask for a Former Players’ Association in every state perhaps because their state associations are bodies where office bearers and representatives are elected through elections.
However, it asks for the establishment of a Former Services Players’ Association. The thing to consider is that the former players association cannot fulfil the obligations of providing grounds and administrative facilities for BCCI commitments.
It is easy to imagine how the rest will unfold. An elected representative of former Services players representing SSCB will have no authority or responsibility towards furthering Services cricket and he will be in a position to derive individual privileges in return of one vote.
Is
It The End Of The Road For Cricket In Services?
It is disappointing that
the least politically involved organisation, the SSCB has to be pushed into a
seemingly political situation to deal with elections and elected
representatives. It would be heartening to see the judiciary appreciate and
support a solution to this potential conflict within the SSCB.
A hypothetical situation comes to mind – what if the armed forces decide to scrap cricket from their list of sports because it has become too commercial/ political for their system? What if SSCB decides not to field a team for Ranji Trophy? Who will the Players’ Association representative then represent? Where will the former players then belong?
These are no small issues, which can be managed by an order, even if it is from the highest judicial authority in the country. We need practical solutions!
The best outcome of the recent order has been to draw attention to the important stakeholders, former Services players’ non-involvement in Cricket Administration.
The situation is not all bleak. We can find a win-win solution, which the judiciary may also appreciate.
- Like the other state associations, SSCB can also be directed to include two representatives from the former Services players in their management committee to deliberate on cricketing matters. Unlike in states, these representatives will have to be men since women’s cricket has not begun in Services. The representatives could be elected by the players’ association.
- If the SSCB Secretary is not a former Services cricketer, he would need to be accompanied by one of the former players’ representatives for the BCCI board meetings.
Disclaimer: The arguments are without prejudice to any individual or organisation and purely based on the knowledge and understanding of the author.
A hypothetical situation comes to mind – what if the armed forces decide to scrap cricket from their list of sports because it has become too commercial/ political for their system? What if SSCB decides not to field a team for Ranji Trophy? Who will the Players’ Association representative then represent? Where will the former players then belong?
These are no small issues, which can be managed by an order, even if it is from the highest judicial authority in the country. We need practical solutions!
Let’s
Think Simple
The best outcome of the recent order has been to draw attention to the important stakeholders, former Services players’ non-involvement in Cricket Administration.
The situation is not all bleak. We can find a win-win solution, which the judiciary may also appreciate.
- Like the other state associations, SSCB can also be directed to include two representatives from the former Services players in their management committee to deliberate on cricketing matters. Unlike in states, these representatives will have to be men since women’s cricket has not begun in Services. The representatives could be elected by the players’ association.
- If the SSCB Secretary is not a former Services cricketer, he would need to be accompanied by one of the former players’ representatives for the BCCI board meetings.
Air Mshl PV Athawale PVSM,
AVSM,VSM (Retd)
Disclaimer: The arguments are without prejudice to any individual or organisation and purely based on the knowledge and understanding of the author.
