Notwithstanding the strong missive sent by the Lodha Committee to the Supreme Court asking it to disqualify all ineligible office bearers with immediate effect, the BCCI and its members have reiterated that they continue to oppose some of the committee's recommendations.
At a special general meeting on Friday, the BCCI said it would stick to the decision taken on October 1 at a previous SGM. Then, the BCCI had said that it had "unanimously" adopted "important recommendations" made by the committee.
However, a deeper reading of the minutes of the October 1 meeting made it clear that the BCCI and the states were against some of the key recommendations such as election and term of an office bearer, one-state-one vote, formation of an Apex Council to replace the existing working committee, and the role of the CEO.
On Friday, BCCI secretary Ajay Shirke did not respond directly to a question on whether the BCCI and the states had effectively decided not to accept the court order of July 18, which had approved most of the recommendations proposed by the committee and asked it to lay out a timeline for the BCCI to put the reforms in place. "We have once again explained to them [members] the position and they have again clarified their position that they stand to their decision taken earlier," Shirke said on Friday, in a brief statement to the media. "So the decision taken on the October 1 SGM, the members have reiterated their position with regards to the reforms."
Shirke said the BCCI would await the court to provide further direction on December 5, when the court reconvenes for the next hearing. On Monday, the court will consider the latest status report submitted by the committee on November 18, when it proposed for the second time that the existing office bearers of the BCCI and state associations be removed if they failed to meet various eligibility norms. The committee has also proposed GK Pillai, a former civil servant, be appointed as an 'observer' to oversee all business conducted by the BCCI.
A state association president who attended Friday's SGM said the matter was out of the BCCI's hands already and it was for the court to take the final call. "We don't have to take any decision. We have said we don't agree [with certain recommendations]. Whatever the Supreme Court says we will have to abide."
This member said there was no reason for the BCCI or states to panic even if the court were to pass an adverse order. "Since the last three meetings our stance has not changed. There is no panic."