The Supreme Court in January 2017 appointed a four-member Committee of Administrators (CoA) led by former Comptroller and Auditor General of India Vinod Rai.
They were appointed to govern and reform cricket which was plagued by conflicts of interest and lapses in ethics.
The SC had made the ruling on the basis of Justice R.M. Lodha Committee’s recommendations.
Now, six months later, the CoA is making news for the wrong reasons. And worse of all, the objective of the Lodha Committee recommendations still remains unaddressed.
Why it failed to achieve its objectives so far?
The CoA’s challenges and helplessness, have been exacerbated by the initially stolid defence of the State bodies.
A case in point is the presence of N. Srinivasan at the special general meeting of the BCCI on June 26, 2017 on behalf of the Tamil Nadu Cricket Association.
With one administrator (Mr Guha) already out, and another, due to leave shortly, Indian cricket now faces a crisis of leadership and confidence.
There is also the issue of whether or not it will be supported, both financially and practically, by the BCCI and the State associations.
Another issue being – the CoA deciding not to increase the overall remuneration percentage for domestic cricketers from 26% of the BCCI’s revenue.
The lingering conflict of interest, ambiguity and insinuations that led to the controversy of a ‘superstar culture’, also dragging in the duality of roles with the IPL as mentors, haven’t helped matters either.
Why the success of CoA is important?
The future of reform in sports governance and administration in India is dependent on the outcome of cricket’s overhaul.
The SC is already mulling a petition across numerous sports, asking for the Lodha Committee reforms to be adopted across federations.
The recommendations have became the beacon for reform across sports, championing the cause of sportspersons, transparency, and ethics.
But there will be reform elsewhere only on the basis of this precedent.
If the CoA fails, then so may any future reform in any Indian sport.
It might also stall the momentum of an imminent, revised national sports code and a vital national sports law.
If a direct mandate from the SC putting the CoA in charge of the BCCI is unable to make any headway, then the code or statute will be even further away from implementation.
What is the way forward?
The CoA needs clarity of thought and resolve, and must focus on its prime objectives, i.e., the universal adoption of the Lodha Committee’s recommendations, making cricket transparent and protected from potentially harmful conflicts, and restoring cricket to its players and fans.
With a finite specified tenure and mandate, and a clear path to eligible elections, a lot can be salvaged.
