|
SPORTS:
CRICKET
Game's
Truant Guardian
The CBI
report indicts the BCCI but shies away from naming names. Board officials
now worry about the sequel report on TV deals.
By
Ashok Malik and Sharda
Ugra
Depending
on how you choose to interpret it, Section V of the Central Bureau of
Investigation's (CBI's) report on the match-fixing scandal reveals one
of two things. First, somewhere in the recesses of CBI's cold, steely
persona throbs the tortured heart of a cricket classicist. Alternatively,
while the CBI has been resolute in its indictment of guilty cricketers
it seems to have pulled its punches in the case of the Board of Control
for Cricket in India (BCCI).
 |
| Officials
like Lele, Dalmiya and Muthiah will have to ponder over the CBI report |
To be fair,
the CBI has spoken for literally millions of cricket fans in questioning
the manner in which the country's favourite sport is run. "The natural
corollary," Section V begins, "to the fact that disclosures
during the CBI inquiry have revealed a thriving player-bookie nexus in
India for nearly a decade begs the question: what was the BCCI doing all
these years ... The BCCI never seriously addressed this problem till the
lid was blown after the Hansie Cronje affair."
There is
ample evidence outside the report to support the CBI's contention. Even
after the Delhi Police made public the conversations between Cronje and
a bookmaker cartel earlier this year, J.Y. Lele, BCCI secretary, called
the tapes "rubbish". Earlier, after the 1994 tour of New Zealand,
team manager N. Venkat Rao had said there were some "black sheep"
in the Indian squad. He was made to retract his statement and eventually
claimed he had been misquoted.
Not that
Rao had much of a choice. The career of his son, promising fast bowler
N. Madhukar, was at stake. Madhukar subsequently played for South Zone
and India A. No wonder then the CBI argues, "There are quite a few
who believe that player selection at the lower levels, such as Under-19,
Ranji Trophy, etc, is not always on merit. Patronage and nepotism operate
rather blatantly."
Focusing
on match-fixing, the CBI writes, "The office-bearers of BCCI over
the past decade or so have been negligent in looking at this problem."
It ascribes this to the "lack of accountability of BCCI to anyone.
The structure of BCCI is such that it is very difficult for any person
who has not previously held a post in BCCI or affiliate units to get into
cricket administration".
There is
specific mention of the "Rajasthan Cricket Association (RCA), which
is being run by the family of Rungtas since its inception and, at present,
even includes 10 employees of Rungtas as members of RCA". These members
"are basically incorporated to ensure that the unchallenged supremacy
of a particular group is not threatened during elections". The CBI
notes that "one Ayub Gauri of Jaipur, with suspected underworld links,
was in charge of security for a particular gate in a match between India
and Pakistan" in Jaipur in 1999. This is the very match Mohammed
Azharuddin has confessed to rigging.
Jaipur is
also home to Kishore Rungta, treasurer, BCCI, who was raided by the income
tax (IT) authorities on July 20 as part of Operation Gentleman. Across
the country, the raids began at 8.30 a.m. but the IT men reached Rungta's
residence only at noon. At that time itself, this "grace period"
had led to whispers that the authorities were being somewhat lenient with
certain influential officials. After the CBI report, conspiracy theories
have erupted once more.
Pg. 2
Top
|
With
all the noise about the cabinet resolution on dilution of the government’s
stakes in public sector banks, is anyone buying shares of these banks,
asks V. Shankar Aiyar in 