What does BCCI actually stand for?

Have you heard the news? According to the Daily Telegraph the BCCI has banned 30 English players from playing and practising in India following India’s humbling in the recent test series.

At this point you probably think I’m joking. Surely a supposedly professional organisation, containing grown men, wouldn’t be so petty and, quite frankly, absurd?

Well, I’m afraid not. The BCCI seems determined to make itself look ridiculous. At this point it’s a toss up whether the BCCI or the leadership of the The Knights That Go Ni are less rational.

Not content with being the only cricket board in the world opposed to the DRS – on the basis that it isn’t 100% accurate (so they’d prefer to rely on the human eye which is even less accurate) – they now seem determined to buck a long standing convention of world cricket.

Cricket’s powerhouse nations have always been ‘open for business’ when it comes to developmental tours and overseas players. Some countries do it more than others, but overall it’s thought that the vitality of cricket, both within host countries and in their domestic leagues, is well served by permitting visiting players.

It’s this high minded mentality that’s seen the likes of Rodney Marsh, Troy Cooley and most recently David Saker help the England team, despite them being as Australian as Paul Hogan.

This is also why, incidentally, England Lions tours and their ilk persist. The international cricket community values these tours because they expose young players to different conditions – it’s part of their education …

The hosts of these tours aren’t worried that members of the Sri Lankan A team, or whoever, will return to foreign shores and score centuries in the future because the health of test cricket is primary – not the fortunes of the host nation exclusively.

If a young Jayawardene entertains crowds all over the world, then this is a good thing. Spectators want to see the best players – and they want to see competitive matches. It could be argued that home advantage is currently too important in deciding the outcome of matches. How many teams win away from home these days?

Unfortunately, the BCCI doesn’t seem to care about this. It’s almost as if they’re frantically looking for a scapegoat and can’t see the bigger picture.

They might not want to admit it, but their position is about as consistent as Virender Sehway’s form: it is the BCCI, after all, which permits IPL franchises to pack their teams with foreigners. Does this not give foreign cricketers a taste of Indian conditions too? It’s amazing how money can create such a colossal blindspot.

When disputes like this arise, it’s important to consider things in the broadest possible context; it’s the only way a semblance of objectivity can be established. Therefore, let’s look at the target of the BCCI’s angst: English cricketers and the ECB (the BCCI did, after all, claim that the England Performance Squad’s tour of India was unsanctioned).

Do the ECB allow Indian cricketers to play in England? The answer is ‘yes’. Does the ECB nurture the health of global cricket by arranging ‘A’ tours and allowing numerous overseas players to ply their trade in county cricket? Again the answer is ‘yes’. Do the ECB ban overseas players whenever England lose a test series? ‘No’. Given these basic truths, who is being unreasonable?

By sending its young players to India, the ECB was simply doing something that the BCCI have consistently failed to do over the years: prepare their best players for test cricket on foreign shores.

If the BCCI want to find a scapegoat for India’s poor form in test cricket, they should be looking at the emphasis they place on limited overs cricket. Banning English cricketers from playing and practicing in India is as mean-spirited as it is a red herring.

Another thing the BCCI should consider is this: why is it necessarily an advantage for young players to play in India? These things can go two ways. In 2009, Middlesex signed a young Australian prodigy  called Phil Hughes. He had just scored two test centuries against South Africa, and looked set to light up the upcoming Ashes series later that summer. It didn’t quite work out that way …

Hughes scored a few runs for Middlesex, but English bowlers (and the watching England captain, Andrew Strauss) got a sneak preview of his game; they soon identified his technical weakness and exploited these in the test matches.

Are Indian cricketers unable to do the same analysis? Perhaps the BCCI’s employees should have spent more time actually watching the likes of Joe Root play for the England Performance Squad, rather than writing nasty letters of complaint to the ECB.

So let’s return to the title of this article. Considering its continued intransigence over the DRS, its dispute with Sky and the BBC over English commentators’ access to Indian grounds, and now this current farce, what does BCCI actually stand for? Is it Board of Control for Cricket in India, or bitter, churlish, culpable and incompetent? I know what many cricket fans around the world are beginning to think.

James Morgan

3 comments

  • The BCCI act like a very spoilt, petulent child with lots of cash and no common sense. When they are winning they shout from the rooftops about how great they are and declare their players to be deities.
    As soon as the tables turn and their gods are found to be mortal they cry foul and look to blame everyone but themselves. Their stance on DRS has been proved to be utter nonsense over and over again, yet they still refuse to use it. I get the feeling that they have become so entrenched in their position that they feel unable to move now.
    In relation to kicking off about EPP tours, clearly they are clutching at straws. This smacks of desperation from a group of people who feel they have nowhere left to turn. I think they can see their cash cow slipping from their grasp. Their stars are no longer the guaranteed winners they were a few years ago and even the ‘great’ Duncan Fletcher cant stop the rot. Given the influence of Indian politics on their sports, and the way things have been done in the past i dont imagine anything much will change. They will continue to milk what they have for all its worth and make excuses for as long as possible. Only when their position becomes untenable will they desert the sinking ship with their pockets stuffed with Rupees.

  • I am sorry to say that this action of the BCCI is just the latest skirmish in the war between the ECB and BCCI. Last year the ECB stopped the IPL from playing in Ireland and Scotland so the BCCI has now retaliated as only they can do – irrationally and without a care as to how they look on the world stage. I re-watched Zulu the other week: the brave British (Welsh) soldiers being led by some arrogant and mis-informed (English) officers, trying to fight off thousands of fit, passionate and newly armed Zulus. Somehow the British avoided defeat at Rourke’s Drift – I am not sure the ECB will be so fortunate in their war.

FOLLOW US ON TWITTER

copywriter copywriting