#dnaEdit: BCCI should implement Lodha Committee recommendations or risk extinction

Time is running out on the Board of Control for Cricket in India to implement the Lodha Committee report if the mood of the Supreme Court bench hearing the matter is any indication. The BCCI’s attempts to buy more time to scrutinise the report came in for criticism at a hearing on Thursday with the court issuing a dire warning that it was better “to fall in line and follow the suggestions to save the trouble”. The BCCI’s hesitation to implement the Lodha Committee report is understandable considering the radical overhaul that the panel has recommended. Already, influential state units like the Mumbai Cricket Association and the Cricket Association of Bengal have rejected most of the panel’s suggestions, indicating that the vested interests in the sport will dig their heels in against the proposed changes. 

The BCCI must understand that the Supreme Court did not start probing its affairs on a whim, but because of complaints it received from various cricket administrators who have held positions as office-bearers in the Board or in the state units. The BCCI’s claims of being an autonomous body registered under the Tamil Nadu Registration of Societies Act does not insulate it from judicial scrutiny. Within the cricketing fraternity, there are those who favour a complete implementation of the Lodha committee report and those who have nitpicked on recommendations that they do not agree with. For example, the influential Mumbai Cricket Association will lose its full membership in the BCCI if the one-state one-vote norm is adhered to. There are also many office-bearers in cricket bodies who are over 70 years of age who will lose their positions now. 

Those unhappy with the Lodha panel report are miffed that the BCCI is being hauled over the coals while the state of affairs is hardly different in other sporting bodies. But in the BCCI’s case, such excuses have run out of steam. It is in the BCCI’s interest to proactively implement the report rather than force the hand of the court to undertake the clean-up act. The benefits that could accrue to the game of cricket and BCCI as an institution are considerable, if the Lodha report, which has examined all aspects of cricket administration, is implemented. The Lodha panel report reveals how the state associations and their vague rules on membership, unrestricted tenures, proxy voting during elections, casual auditing of expenditures, and interference in team selection, have created unwritten rules that do not bode well for the future of cricket.

The resistance of regional cricket associations to the Lodha report recommendations will complicate the process. For far too long, the BCCI has adopted a hands-off approach to the administration of its member associations.

This had lead to a situation where norms of accountability and transparency practiced in government or in corporate companies are anathema to cricket administrators. The Lodha report may appear unfair to politicians, longtime cricket administrators, and state cricket association office-bearers because its prescribes a one-man one-post system, a maximum tenure of nine years, and a bar against serving two successive terms. But it must be borne in mind that the Lodha committee had the opportunity to study the evils plaguing the BCCI and it has correctly observed that institutional interest must take precedence over individual interest. The intervention of courts in matters outside its area of expertise like providing administrative superintendence or suggesting policy changes have rarely yielded success. The Supreme Court must keep up the pressure on the BCCI and monitor the Lodha report’s implementation, but it must desist from getting directly involved in matters of cricket administration.