The ongoing controversy between the BCCI/COA and its Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC) comprising Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman—which erupted midway through this IPL season—is essentially rooted in lax processes followed by the cricket administration.

The three former players, who enjoy an exalted status in Indian cricket, have had to answer to charges of `conflict of interest’ on a complaint about their connections with franchises in the IPL. They have not taken it kindly.

Ganguly is advisor to Delhi Capitals, Laxman is mentor to Sunrisers Hyderabad, while the exact nature of Tendulkar’s association with Mumbai Indians has been questioned.

Ganguly, also president of the Cricket Association of Bengal, has claimed that he had taken prior permission from authorities. Tendulkar denies receiving monetary benefit, in fact, says that he isn’t involved in any decision-making in the franchise. Laxman does not deny being paid by his franchise, but hotly contests any wrongdoing.

Ganguly’s matter has since apparently been addressed, but both Tendulkar and Laxman have sought personal hearings, accompanied by their lawyers, with the newly appointed BCCI ombudsman Justice D K Jain, after submitting written rebuttals.

Of these, Laxman’s has been a particularly stinging response and highlights the core of the problem. The operative part of his reply is instructive of why such a situation would have arisen.

“On December 7, 2018,’’ writes Laxman, ``we had written to the COA requesting them to clarify the scope of our roles and responsibilities. To this date, there has been no reply.

“Since no tenure had been mentioned in the letter of intent in 2015, it was only reasonable to expect some communication on whether the CAC was still in existence. Unfortunately that has not been forthcoming…

“The allegation of the complainant are baseless as we are in no manner selectors of either coaches and CAC is not a permanent body.’’

That is rather damning of the thoughtless way the BCCI/COA has dealt with the CAC: Imagine a member questioning it’s very existence.

Back to the controversy, what were the parameters on which appointments were made? Was any attention paid to possible conflicts of interest emerging? Were the appointees told what’s kosher and what’s not?

For instance, was it specified that an office-bearer of the BCCI (after Ganguly became present of CAB) can also hold an advisory position with a franchise, irrespective of being paid or not, only if prior permission is taken? If not, why? Moreover, could an office bearer hold two positions, even if both are honorary?

Also, Tendulkar and Laxman, had been part of the IPL in some capacity -- paid or not -- for a fair number of years before being appointed to the CAC. If there was even a remote possibility of conflict of interest, why was it not addressed then?

Clarity on these matters at inception itself would have prevented the present controversy, and not taken away focus from what the CAC was intended for. And if the BCCI was negligent, what has the COA been doing since taking charge?

To rewind to 2015, the CAC was instituted with the express purpose of improving India’s performances at the international level, especially when playing overseas.

Originally, Rahul Dravid was to be part of the CAC, but he declined, opting instead (as it turned out, wisely) to coach the India under-19 and India A teams. Nonetheless, getting Tendulkar, Ganguly and Laxman on board was a coup.

However, what exactly they were supposed to do was drowned in the brouhaha of their appointment.

My apprehension then was that appointing these great players should not become just window dressing. Sadly, this has precisely been the case as Laxman’s acidic letter suggests.

As is now clear, the stellar CAC was more or less dysfunctional. Recently, they were asked to choose a women’s coach in a day, in mid-2017, there was the unedifying rigmarole over selecting the men’s coach. Apart from that, there’s not much to show.

It is unlikely that the complaint against the three stalwarts will stand. But that this script should be so bumpy and end in farce is perhaps symptomatic of the malaise that afflicts Indian cricket administration.

The writer is a senior cricket journalist. Views are personal

First Published: May 02, 2019 09:39 IST