National and International

The Big Fight: If you thought Kumble vs Kohli was bad, COA vs CAC is much worse

At the height of the row Anil Kumble, Virat Kohli, one of the recurring suggestions often made sense: why not sit at the table and fix things?

Now, as the fights between the Committee of Directors appointed by the Supreme Court (COA) and the Advisory Committee of Cricket (ACC) reached embarrassing proportions, it may be time to ask the same question: why not sit at the table to fix things?

The constant back and forth between the two committees underscores a complete lack of transparency and communication between the two. So much so that even the absurd can strike a dark and twisted way so strange.

The program events that have occurred since Sourav Ganguly, Sachin Tendulkar and VVS Laxman interviewed candidates for training in India is not only confusing but also very disturbing.

July 10: The CAC maintains the five candidates and decided to delay the decision because they felt the need to speak to the captain of India, Virat Kohli.

July 10: ACO President Vinod Rai called for ACC to complete the process before July 11. The news has been the subject of documents through a source.

July 11: Sourav Ganguly, however, was in doubt over the sudden implementation of the ACO. He said the ACO was part of the decision (to delay the announcement).

July 12: CAC appoints Ravi Shastri as team coach of India. They also appoint Rahul Dravid as a consultant for travel abroad and Zaheer Khan as a consultant for bowling.

July 12: BCCI issues a press release. The subject line of the email was sent: the Steering Committee welcomes the recommendation of the ACC trainer. It was an unsigned letter.

July 13: According to reports citing sources, the Directors’ Committee was not satisfied with the ACC’s decision to elect job counselors and bowling.

July 13: BCCI published another press release in which thanked Ganguly, Tendulkar and Laxman have performed “the assigned task with total transparency, professionalism and commitment of Indian cricket.”

July 14: The Mumbai Mirror bears a front page article quoting an unidentified COA source who talks about how the “Big Three have mined Ravi Shastri to name Zaheer and Dravid” and also mentions that Zaheer Dravid’s appointment will be examined and on Sunday July 16th).

July 14: ACC in very firm terms written a letter to the head of the CAC, Vinod Rai, which, of course, is released.

July 14: insider discloses that the COA will ask Zaheer Khan to waive the contract of the Indian Premier League work in India.

July 14: Another BCCI press release. This time, they affirm that Ravi Shastri was consulted before they are named Zaheer and Dravid.

The most troubling part of the whole issue should be how much the COA is severely compromised. They have only three members now – President Vinod Rai, Vikram Limaye Eduljee and Diana – and were appointed by the Supreme Court to reform the BCCI.

In fact, they have a mandate to resolve things in the way they see best. Despite this, you still feel the need to talk to newspapers and agencies as “sources.”

Surely they could have picked up the phone and called Ganguly, Tendulkar and Laxman. Instead, they chose a well-established BCCI and presented their views as the source.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *