CHENNAI: Fingers might be pointed at Shashank Manohar for not acting in the best interest of Indian cricket. It might even be directed at the Supreme Court for putting the BCCI in a fix, which left them without time to take on the ICC. The old dispensation can fume and can even feel aggrieved. But one look at the mirror will tell how a monster — now cut down to size — has to blame itself for being in a position where it gave others a chance to avenge all the bullying it had subjected them to in the past.
Three years back, when BCCI, Cricket Australia (CA) and England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) came up with the Big 3 model that meant more revenue for them at the expense of the rest, nobody even bothered to stand up. Manohar then came up with an alternative, which meant the BCCI’s share would come down from $570 million to $290 million.
Threatening to pull out of Champions Trophy in protest, the BCCI didn’t pay attention when Manohar offered them an additional $100 million.
The BCCI believed Zimbabwe, Bangladesh and West Indies will side with it. Sadly, it received a sound thrashing when matters came to votes. For the revenue model, the ICC voted 8-2 in favour and for the governance structure, only the BCCI voted against. After Dalmiya’s rise to the top post, this was the first time that the BCCI saw all other members opposing it.
“The ICC has to treat every country as equal and finally, we are seeing encouraging signs on that front. When the BCCI wanted to implement the Big 3 formula, it promised plenty of series against South Africa, Pakistan and even Test tours to Zimbabwe. But they never honoured the MoU and these countries started losing trust.
And by the time Australia and England had new heads running the show, they realised the blunder they had made. Now, every board is united in favour of a revenue model and that’s how it should be. The BCCI doesn’t need so much money. It’s Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Pakistan and Sri Lanka who need the money badly. In a way, BCCI was let down by its own guard,” former ICC president Ehsan Mani told Express on Wednesday.
Soon after the February meeting, where the voting pattern was similar, the BCCI tried to convince West Indies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe and even held negotiations a day before the meeting in Dubai. But there was a significant change in the way the likes of Dalmiya or Sharad Pawar managed Asian votes. Dalmiya had brought the Asian bloc together and they remained by and large unified when it came to important decisions. This unity in the Asian bloc is not to be seen anymore, especially after former board president N Srinivasan allied with Australia and England.
“The BCCI has always wanted more money as it generates more revenue. But in the past, during Dalmiya’s period or during my time and even during Malcolm Gray’s period, the BCCI had ensured that even the Asian countries got their share. They in return stood beside India. But, over time, the BCCI has lost the support of its neighbours and that’s why it finds itself isolated. Not even Bangladesh voted for them today, which shows where things stand at the moment,” Mani noted.
venkatakrishna@newindianexpress.com