BCCI gets a chance to complain
Normally a parameter to evaluate agility and ability of cricketers, age has become a talking point in Indian cricket administration for the last few years. A Lodha Commission guideline to reform the BCCI, which has been endorsed by the apex court, specifies that those above 70 are not eligible to hold office. Aimed at
Published: 26th May 2018 04:00 AM | Last Updated: 26th May 2018 01:09 AM | A+A A-
Normally a parameter to evaluate agility and ability of cricketers, age has become a talking point in Indian cricket administration for the last few years. A Lodha Commission guideline to reform the BCCI, which has been endorsed by the apex court, specifies that those above 70 are not eligible to hold office. Aimed at stopping the practice of people occupying chairs for decades, this was opposed vociferously by board members, but the court threw out their plea.
In a queer turn of events, the same restriction has bounced back to put the court-appointed panel of administrators (CoA) in a spot of bother. It’s head Vinod Rai turned 70 on May 23. Those in the BCCI at the receiving end saw this as an opportunity to embarrass the governing body. “Age does not matter if matter does not age,” read a message to Rai from Niranjan Shah, former BCCI secretary, who is above 70 and had to vacate the seat of Saurashtra Cricket Association secretary after occupying it for 43 years.
Certain state units have also questioned Rai’s right to continue, citing official correspondence signed by him which among other points stated that people above 70 should not attend BCCI meetings. Considering that, asking if Rai can function as de-facto BCCI chief after crossing that age is a valid question.
While whether Rai should step aside on his own or wait for further orders from the court can be debated, what is obvious is that this is no fault of the former CAG. He was appointed as CoA chief in January 2017. Nobody, perhaps not even the court, anticipated that implementing its orders would take so long.
That way, there is a difference in him completing 70 when on the job and BCCI officials clinging on to their chairs. At the same time, it is indeed an anomaly that the person carrying out the reform operation is himself violating a key clause. This is just the kind of fodder disgruntled BCCI officials were looking for. It’s a complicated situation, which will not get any clarity until the learned judges decide on the next step.