Tucked away just inside the gates of theWankhede Stadium is a prosaic five-storey block housing the world’s richestcricket board and the large office of its president, a man who could easily bedescribed as the most powerful figure in the sport.
Narayanaswami Srinivasan is a 67-year-oldindustrialist, the managing director of India Cement, and head of a cricketboard which sits on more than $600 million in reserves thanks to a giantcricket-mad populace.
Television loves nothing more than a big captiveaudience, a fact reflected in the hundreds of millions of dollars the Board ofControl for Cricket in India demands for its media rights. With this hugefinancial clout comes the power to shape decisions and the direction of theworld game.
But how the BCCI administers this influencehas attracted criticism from sources as disparate as Wisden and an academicfrom Stanford University.
The editor of Wisden this year accused theBCCI of being “driven by the self-interest of the few” while Tunku Varadarajan,editor of Newsweek International and a fellow at the Hoover Institution atStanford University, wrote this week that the Indian board is “vulgar. RuiningTest cricket by inflicting on it death-by-IPL”.
Sitting at the top of this new “imperialpower” (Varadarajan again) is Srinivasan, a softly-spoken man with a reputationfor driving a hard bargain if you talk to sources at the England and WalesCricket Board. “I don’t agree with what they [the critics] say,” he tells TheTelegraph in a rare interview. “Some of the comments are not fair to BCCI. Thatthe BCCI are bothered only about money I think is incorrect.
“Until the late 1990s the president of the MCCwas always president of ICC and I don’t remember people asking ECB and MCC suchquestions when for decades they were in control. I don’t see the BCCI as beingin control. It just so happens that a lot of sponsorship money comes out ofIndia. That doesn’t mean BCCI controls cricket. That is the wrong perception.
“The positive things we have done have notbeen highlighted. We have not gone and publicised it but we have made changes.First we have improved infrastructure for cricket in this country. We have 22one-day international venues and with the resources we have got from mediarights we have a policy where every association gets a grant up to $10 millionto build stadiums.
"We take cricket to rural India. Englandwill play in three new stadiums [Rajkot, Ranchi and Dharamasala] during theone-day series. All these have been created because of the policies of theBCCI.”
The IPL is the cash cow. Only 24 hours beforewe met, the BCCI had signed a five-year naming rights deal with Pepsi worth $72million. Srinivasan’s company owns the Chennai Super Kings, but he dismissesaccusations of a clash of interests although he will not be drawn on the issue.
It is the IPL which is blamed for the lowturnouts at Test matches in India, the reordering of priorities by othernations as they offer up their best players to the Twenty20 league in order notto fall out with India.
“T20 cricket was not invented by us,” saysSrinivasan. “The IPL has brought new audience into the game: the housewife andchildren. It has broadened the viewership base and interest in cricket. Butthere is still a lot of interest in Test cricket.
“I’m an old-timer. To me Test cricket isnumber one. That is personally speaking. If you look at cricket we now havethree products: Tests ODIs and T20s. If you look at the overall attendances andeyeballs they have gone up. What people are asking is for maximum attendancefor all three versions. It might not happen.”
This series is played without the DecisionReview System. The BCCI’s doubts over its accuracy remain even though with itin harness they would have finished England off quicker in Ahmedabad last week.Srinivasan dismisses rumours the BCCI’s opposition is based on the fact DRS isdisliked by Sachin Tendulkar and MS Dhoni.
“The BCCI position is that we don’t accept theball tracking system as being accurate,” he says. “The second aspect is that ithas been decided that you will only have two referrals. If you believe DRS is absolutelyaccurate and you want to get every decision right then should you not bereferring every appeal? If you are giving a captain only two it is like alottery.
“All of us grew up with the firm understandingthe umpire’s decision is final. This is a very fundamental shift. We arequestioning the umpire’s authority with this. If we look at it conceptually onthe one hand we say you should not show dissent to umpire’s decision. At thesame time we have a parallel system in which you can appeal and refer hisdecision. There is a fundamental problem. These two things do not reconcile.
“I am not stopping others using DRS if theybelieve in it. But they have agreed it has to be mutual. Unless we areconvinced about ball tracking it will not change.”
Srinivasan leaves office in 2014, and has beentipped for the newly created role of chairman of the ICC but he refuses to bedrawn on this. “I don’t look beyond what I am doing now. In the sense I have myhands full at the BCCI.”
He also refuses to answer whether he wouldsupport Giles Clarke in any bid for the job but describes the BCCI as having a“very good working relationship” with the ECB. The old and new super powershave learnt to co-exist.