CHENNAI: Even as the Committee of Administrators (CoA) in its meeting in New Delhi on Monday cleared the Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC) to appoint the next coach of the senior Indian team, it wasn’t an easy decision.
While Vinod Rai and Ravi Thodge agreed that the panel should go ahead with the task, they faced opposition from Diana Edulji, who argued that only the BCCI general body can form a CAC.
She also said CAC member Kapil Dev has a conflict of interest, since he is part of the steering committee of the Indian Cricketers’ Association. She was of the view that the matter should be referred to the ethics officer.
But since there was 2-1 majority, the CoA felt there was no need to sent it to ethics officer DK Jain. While Edulji could only record her dissent in the meeting, it is understood that she is likely to push the matter further.
“I wanted to go to the ethics officer because the CAC is an ad-hoc panel and the constitution has no place for it. There is conflict of interest since nobody can hold more than one position in the BCCI,” Edulji told TNIE.
Edulji’s contention is that the CAC formed in 2015 comprising Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman was deemed ineligible because of conflict of interest and the new panel can be appointed only by the general body. But given the prevailing uncertainty over the general body, using that option is not possible at the moment.
When Rai named Kapil, Anshuman Gaekwad and Shantha Rangaswamy in the CAC, Edulji had raised the same point. But Rai insisted it was alright since the CAC would seize to exist after the BCCI AGM.
With Edulji showing dissent, the issue may prolong. She has already appealed against the appointment of the women’s coach and the matter is lying with the ethics officer. This time with Kapil and Shantha being part of the steering committee of the ICA, she believes they shouldn’t be part of any other panel.
Elections to get delayed?
Even as around 26 state units have appointed electoral officers to oversee their elections, the dates are likely to be pushed back because of time constraints. State units were supposed to appoint electoral officers by July 25, but since a hearing in the Supreme Court is scheduled for August 8, a few units are yet to do so.
“Most of them are fully compliant. A few need some clarity and they have approached the court. We should have a clear picture by this week or early next week. The elections are slated for September 14 and that is about a month from now. Under the circumstances, it isn’t possible to hold election as scheduled,” an official said.