I’m here to stay and run Indian cricket: Vinod Rai tells BCCI

File image of Vinod Rai | Getty Images

In letter to the Board, CoA gives its own interpretation of Supreme Court’s order, indicating its intention to cling onto power.

Bengaluru: The highest courts of the country waded into cricket administration aiming to cleanse the game of certain malaises but have opened the doors to the most naked clinging to power Indian cricket has seen.

The Committee of Administrators (CoA), sent to cricket by the Supreme Court to oversee implementation of their orders, morphed into an alternate administration. Vinod Rai, who was tasked to ensure that no official beyond 70 remained in administration, has done all he can to stay in harness even after his court-mandated stewardship has run its course. And, of course, he celebrated his 70th recently, but like all autocrats he asks that you do as he says, not as he does.

The latest missive from the CoA to the BCCI is straight from the Joseph Goebbels playbook.

The logical smokes and mirrors presented by the CoA in their directive are quite clear, and you can read the entire communication here, but the long and short of what they have to say is instructive.

The CoA asserts that it was given the mandate to run Indian cricket while matters of reform, constitution and much else was in court. The Supreme Court of India delivered its final judgment on August 9, and 14 days later, the CoA issues a directive based on its interpretation of the ruling.

Sample this:

“All affairs of the BCCI shall be conducted in accordance with the New Constitution and the judgments and orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Any function to be performed by the Apex Council and/or the Governing Council under the New Constitution shall be performed by the Committee of Administrators until a new Apex Council and Governing Council are elected.”

The CoA has to oversee the appointment of these councils, and till such time as they see fit, they can remain in charge.

“Any powers exercisable by any office bearer will henceforth be only as mandated under the New Constitution and shall be exercised only with the prior approval of the Committee of Administrators. The office bearers and/or their respective Executive Assistants as well as the employees of BCCI shall not undertake any travel outside India at BCCI expense without the prior approval of the Committee of Administrators.”

At this time it might be sensible to abbreviate BCCI office bearer to simply bearer, the gentleman at your club or restaurant who refreshes the glass of water, brings you your gin and tonic or serves you your biriyani. If office bearers of the BCCI are beholden to the CoA at every step, what is the point of having a BCCI president?

Remember when Jagmohan Dalmiya changed cricket’s geo-politics? Remember when Sharad Pawar ensured ease of business to the BCCI in building infrastructure? Remember when N. Srinivasan argued that India’s financial clout should mean a different profit-staring model?

If any of those men held posts in the BCCI today, they would have to ask the CoA for permission to take an economy class flight from Delhi to Colombo.

And here’s the clincher:

“BCCI shall no longer bear the expenses of any legal advisor/ consultant who is taking instructions from and/or reporting to any office bearer. Any such existing appointment/ engagement shall be terminated.”

Which means that this latest interpretation of the verdicts of the court, over the last few years, may not be challenged by anyone in the BCCI. At the very least, no legal fees may be paid to anyone attempting to question something that has been in the courts for years.

When put in place by the Supreme Court, the remit of the CoA, and its now one man, Vinod Rai, was to oversee the implementation of reforms, which was then expanded to administration of the BCCI, in the interim.

In which Supreme Court judgment they were authorised to usurp control of administration is not clear. If they had doubts about their powers, Rai and friends could have sought clarification from the court. Instead, they plugged into the loopholes, announced that a new constitution had been registered, when there is only evidence of it being submitted, and clung dearly on to their posts in Indian cricket.

There was a time when you had to be elected to a post and even now, that is clearly the intent of the Hon’ble Court. Presently, it seems that the CoA elects itself, decides its terms of engagement, and, it bears repeating that Mr Rai, it seems, will not relinquish office even as he enforces the court’s directive that retirement begins at 70.

He came to reform cricket administration and now he seemingly clings to his un-elected post and enhances his power through interpretations of the court’s decrees.

Chemotherapy is only administered when all else fails. It can kill perfectly normal people otherwise. Rai should be more careful. He might be able to cure a major problem, but when you let him loose on a mostly healthy ecosystem, the results may not be what you expect.