A look at the key issues between the BCCI and the Lodha Committee as the board prepares to respond to the status report in the Supreme Court
Why was a status report presented in the Supreme Court?
While passing the order on July 18, the Supreme Court had asked the BCCI to follow the directives of the Lodha Committee, which was put in charge of overseeing the process of overhauling the governance structure of the board. "Should any impediments arise, the Committee shall be free to seek appropriate directions from this Court by filing a status report in that regard," the order stated. RM Lodha, the chairman of the Lodha Committee, and a former Chief Justice of India, said his team had faced "serious impediments" in dealing with the BCCI and elaborated on the same in the status report.
While passing the order on July 18, the Supreme Court had asked the BCCI to follow the directives of the Lodha Committee, which was put in charge of overseeing the process of overhauling the governance structure of the board. "Should any impediments arise, the Committee shall be free to seek appropriate directions from this Court by filing a status report in that regard," the order stated. RM Lodha, the chairman of the Lodha Committee, and a former Chief Justice of India, said his team had faced "serious impediments" in dealing with the BCCI and elaborated on the same in the status report.
What were the impediments?
The Lodha Committee said the BCCI had not complied with as many as seven timelinesby the deadline of September 30. The board had not accepted the fresh Memorandum of Association and rules and regulations, which would have been an indicator of the BCCI deciding to implement the recommendations.
The Lodha Committee said the BCCI had not complied with as many as seven timelinesby the deadline of September 30. The board had not accepted the fresh Memorandum of Association and rules and regulations, which would have been an indicator of the BCCI deciding to implement the recommendations.
What else did the BCCI do to draw such flak?
According to Lodha, several decisions taken at the BCCI's AGM were contrary to the committee's recommendations. Some of them were: Ajay Shirke being elected board secretary though he had not mentioned his eligibility criteria in the nomination form, and the board picking five-member selection panels when the recommendations said three. The Committee was also unhappy that the BCCI had called a special general meeting on September 30 to "consider" the recommendations, when it had said earlier that it would meet by September 28 to implement the recommendations.
According to Lodha, several decisions taken at the BCCI's AGM were contrary to the committee's recommendations. Some of them were: Ajay Shirke being elected board secretary though he had not mentioned his eligibility criteria in the nomination form, and the board picking five-member selection panels when the recommendations said three. The Committee was also unhappy that the BCCI had called a special general meeting on September 30 to "consider" the recommendations, when it had said earlier that it would meet by September 28 to implement the recommendations.
What happened at the SGM?
After the meeting in Mumbai, the BCCI said it had "unanimously" accepted "important recommendations" of the Lodha Committee. In fact, it had selectively accepted recommendations, and the key ones not adopted included: an age cap of 70 for BCCI administrators, a maximum term of nine years and a cooling off period of three years between each three-year term, and the one-state-one-vote policy.
After the meeting in Mumbai, the BCCI said it had "unanimously" accepted "important recommendations" of the Lodha Committee. In fact, it had selectively accepted recommendations, and the key ones not adopted included: an age cap of 70 for BCCI administrators, a maximum term of nine years and a cooling off period of three years between each three-year term, and the one-state-one-vote policy.
Why is the BCCI against adopting these three recommendations?
The nine-year tenure limit - broken into three, three-year terms with a three-year cooling off period between each term - will hinder continuity, the BCCI said. According to the board, these restrictions will deter able administrators from joining the BCCI.
The nine-year tenure limit - broken into three, three-year terms with a three-year cooling off period between each term - will hinder continuity, the BCCI said. According to the board, these restrictions will deter able administrators from joining the BCCI.
Were there any other transgressions by BCCI?
On September 30, the BCCI conducted an unscheduled working committee meeting, at which it took a few financial decisions, including doubling the Test match fee for the men's team. There were two other decisions taken, which the Lodha Committee objected to: an additional INR 10 crore being granted to full member state associations to increase the infrastructure subsidy to INR 70 crore, and the distribution of compensation money received from the broadcaster as a result of the cancellation of the Champions League T20, which was about INR 550 crore according to the committee. On October 4, the Committeewarned state associations not to touch the funds that had been received from the BCCI between September 29 and October 1 and were related to those two transactions.
On September 30, the BCCI conducted an unscheduled working committee meeting, at which it took a few financial decisions, including doubling the Test match fee for the men's team. There were two other decisions taken, which the Lodha Committee objected to: an additional INR 10 crore being granted to full member state associations to increase the infrastructure subsidy to INR 70 crore, and the distribution of compensation money received from the broadcaster as a result of the cancellation of the Champions League T20, which was about INR 550 crore according to the committee. On October 4, the Committeewarned state associations not to touch the funds that had been received from the BCCI between September 29 and October 1 and were related to those two transactions.