Upheaval Time for BCCI

And so it has finally happened! ICL paraded 44 cricketers from the Indian domestic scene and made a bold statement of intent to the BCCI and to all their doubters. Most had reckoned that BCCI would slay the beast even before it could stand on its feet. I have long been an advocate about something like the ICL - just not in its present format and definitely not at this time.

However, the fact of the matter is, we live in a capitalist economy, where money is the sole criteria for most of the things that we do. Some editor on cricinfo questioned what would the players play for since they are not playing for a country, state or a club - the answer is quite simple - MONEY. What more do you need? Which domestic cricketer in India makes $75K (approximately Rs. 3.3 M or 33 Lakhs) in one year?

It will be better if the BCCI wakes up to this reality and embraces ICL - BCCI needs the ICL as much as the domestic cricketers do. And it's not only for their money and TV experience. They need ICL's management expertise more than anything else. It will be nothing short of a miracle, and one that is bound to happen, if the ICL manages to conduct a 50 over tournament sometime next year. And it will be tribute to ICL's management team for making it happen, whenever it does. To conceptualize and implement, even something like a Twenty20 tournament, with whatever players the ICL has mustered so far, is something to admire. Of course, some might argue that the tournament is still not underway, lacks the infrastructure and is not able to come up with a schedule. My only point to them would be - talk to Lalu Prasad Yadav. It's a different story that Lalu has vested interests in ICL (his son being one).

Sanjay Manjrekar pointed out that BCCI needs a nudge to professionalize itself. I believe it has long been nudged by various people, but BCCI never yielded to those demands. Of course, if they don't yield now, I am willing to bet that they will no longer be in existence. ICC is supposed to rule on the ICL, and I think I know how that meeting is going to go. It is going to be fractious to say the least. On the one hand, they need BCCI for their financial strength, however on the other, they want to make sure that BCCI is not a monopolistic body and does not have the same negotiating power that it does now. At this point in time, it will be too early to approve ICL, however, given some time I am pretty confident that the ICC will approve the ICL. They won't have a choice.

It is indeed time for some serious upheaval for the BCCI, regardless of whether they mend their ways and professionalize themselves or not. If they do mend their ways and become professional, the possibilities will be endless!

Global Warming in Cricket!!

Its funny what global warming is doing to cricket - we just witnessed an Indian Summer after an English Spring in England. It surely was a team performance, something that should make Rahul Dravid and the Indian cricket fans really proud. They can finally start believing in themselves and start winning more games/series and not just the odd game (as has happened in the past 4-5 years). I am hoping this win spurs more youngsters to play the game and secure a bright future for India in cricket in the years to come, just like 1983, when Kapil's devils won the World Cup and spurred a certain Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar.

A lot will be said about Rahul Dravid's decision to not enforce the follow on yesterday. My take on it was completely different at the time when I first read that India had not enforced the follow-on. I was of the opinion that it was a stupid decision (not defensive - that would be different, but stupid). I never considered the decision to be defensive - Rahul was out there to win the series, and the scoreline rarely matters in a series win. From that perspective, Rahul's decision was spot on. My only concern was that after not enforcing the follow-on, he should have batted on and not even declared. He should have gone the full distance, letting England prise out 10 wickets rather than declaring at 6 down. God knows what might have happened had KP got into the act and smashed our bowlers all over the Oval. That, was my problem with Rahul's decision making process yesterday.

Sledging and Jelly beans

I could not resist. I had to write. I mean, even when we played a cricket match, when still at school, did we not through jelly beans or sweets or even chewing gums on our opponents to disintegrate them mentally. That would have been ridiculous and would never have been allowed by our coach, a former military guy. He would rather we focus on our skills with the bat and ball rather than learn English for a game of cricket. It was stooping to the lowest of any standards. I wonder if Cook, when he played for his school team, ever did something like this. And honestly, I am not sure what Vaughan was doing when he said he believed his team that no one was "throwing" jelly beans, rather they were left there after a drinks break. In fact his statement was made to look ridiculous in light of Peter Moores' statement the next day, when he acknowledged that jelly beans were indeed "thrown" at Zaheer. He went on to add that the incident was being blown out of proportions and should be forgotten. I beg to differ on that. I don't think the incident has been blown out of proportions and in no way should it be forgotten. It would only take one jelly bean, on a length, for the batsman to get out. Are we saying that I can walk with jelly beans on my person, and then when I jump across the pitch, on a length, to let one fall off around the length area so that it would aid my bowlers get a wicket? Of course, if I was caught, I would plead ignorance to the whole episode when I am summoned by the match referee in his office.

India, on their part, replied back with interest to whatever sledging England had on offer. But does the fact that England were the instigators, absolve India of any wrong-doing? I don't think so. India were as guilty as the English. Yes, they stood up to the sledging and paid back with interest, but I am not one for letting my mouth do the talking. I would much rather let my bat do the talking. I was surprised that Rahul in the post match conference said that he was happy his boys had played tough cricket. I would have been much happier if he had censured Sreesanth a bit more in the press conference. There is no place for body contact in the game of cricket, and Sreesanth should be taken into a corner, and told so in no uncertain terms about the consequences of body contact, if it was to be repeated.

All of the above, brings me to the role of match referees and umpires and their say on what goes on in a cricket field. What I have noticed so far is that umpires rarely come in and have a tough word with the offenders. They let it drift, sometimes to a point where sledging becomes personal. I think that has something to do with the advent of match referees. Ever since match referees were introduced in cricket, umpires seem to think it is one less thing that they have to worry about. I don't think Dave Shepherd or Dickie Bird would have allowed any of the nonsense that took place in last week's game at Trent Bridge. I remember, even in our school playing days, how we would respect the umpire. We would be afraid, if the umpire were to pull us up for being a total idiot on the field. I believe that the umpires should be given more powers for any on-field non-behavior. The best way would be to penalize the offending team by awarding runs to the opposing team. And please, someone, do away with the financial penalties. Who cares about money received from playing a test match anyways?

More than the fear of being penalized all players should realize that they are on the cricket field to play tough cricket, with skill and talent, and not with their mouths. They might be role-models for millions of fans. They are there to preserve the integrity of the sport. And lastly, they should always ask the question - would I speak like this to any one, if my child was around? I am pretty sure, the answer to the question would always be a resounding NO. My advice to all those playing with their mouths - get a perspective - cricket is a sport after all.