Timeless Test
The last “Timeless Test” in
cricket was played out at Durban between England and South Africa over 3rd
March to 14th March 1939. England had been leading the series 1-0 before
the start of this test and the match was to have been played out till one team
was victorious, as it could change the outcome of the series. The match, poised
very interestingly on the Tea of 10th day of play, had to be
declared a ‘draw’ ultimately as the time did indeed run out with England having
to rush off to catch their ship back to Blighty. But No, this is not an account
of that epic test. This is all about another “test” which I feel is just
warming up. Another time, another “pitch” and most unusual teams, BCCI v/s Justice
Lodha Panel.
That’s right. Just take a look at what BCCI
has reportedly responded to Lodha Panel’s recommendations which by the way have
also been sort of endorsed by Supreme Court when it asked BCCI to comply with
them.
Ø Justice
Lodha Panel’s Recommendations (JLPR): BCCI should appoint a CEO and a CFO for
conducting its affairs.
BCCI (what it says): Yes, we
will. We will start the process of indentifying an agency which will search for
the CXOs.
BCCI (What it perhaps means): In
simple words, the pace at which we (BCCI) are accustomed to work, we will take
about 6-12 months, including due
consultations with all member associations, to identify the agency which will carry out the
executive search. Obviously the independent agency, being an independent agency,
cannot be pressurized to deliver in a time-bound manner and therefore will take
its own time (read indefinite) to draw up a short-list of potentials, after
doing the necessary due diligence. Once this is accomplished BCCI as the
employer can rightfully reject any or all of the candidates so short-listed.
For a nation which thrives on tendering and re-tendering of contracts till the
powers-that-be are “satisfied” that the contract has gone to the “deserving”
party, it should not come as a surprise if the entire process will have to be
looped through again (and again if required). So make it about 3 years before
CXOs can assume office.
Ø JLPR: No politicians and bureaucrats on governing bodies and no office – bearers
over 70 years.
BCCI (What it says): This will deprive the sport of the experience
and acumen that the current set of administrators have developed over decades.
BCCI (What it perhaps means): In
simple words. No one has the right to make us alight the gravy train that we
have clambered on after years of hardships, shouting slogans on the street, dharnas and satyagrahas, storming the
wells of State Assemblies and Parliament. Not all of us are lucky enough to
jump to ICC in the nick of time.
Ø JLPR: No ads in between overs.
BCCI (What it says): This will reduce our revenue to 1/3rd.
This will reduce the quality of services that we can provide to the game.
BCCI (What it perhaps means): In
simple words. Everyone including players and teams and commentators and administrators
are so attuned to the 7-Star lifestyle that all of them have long enjoyed
that any reduction will push all these guys below poverty line. Imagine
Yuvaraj getting just Rs 2 crores for a season of IPL!
As the things stand, BCCI has
hinted that individual member associations may file separate petitions in
Supreme Court for mitigation of various (real or perceived or made-up) issues
that they may have.
All this, as I mentioned in the
beginning, is just the first session of play in what is likely to be the latest
“Timeless Test”. It is quite evident
that BCCI is hopeful that by delaying acceptance / implementation of JLPRs,
they may be able to maneuver things to suit their own end. For all you know,
since politicians of all hues are involved in BCCI and member associations, some
hurried legislation may be drafted in consideration of common good and pushed
through which will ensure that political – administrators of sports bodies are
beyond the writ of any law. One should not be surprised if such a law is the
only one that sails through smoothly in a parliamentary session while mundane
issues like the General Budget and GST are postponed indefinitely. After all
united we stand.
My friend Guy Wise sees a lot of
irony in this development. After having
resolutely voted against the Decision Review System (DRS), BCCI is clamouring
for DRS now that the on-field umpire’s decision has (rightly) gone against
them.
We, poor cricket lovers, can take
solace from the fact that at least in this instance, there is no ship scheduled to sail at any time soon and the
match will not peter out into a tame draw resulting in status quo and we can expect
a (favourable) decision without much delay.
For BCCI, the writing will soon be flashed on the giant screen.
LazyBee
21st February 2016
A lot of my friends, I am sure,
would like to know a bit more about the “timeless test” at Durban.
South Africa: 1st
Innings : 530 / 10 (Pieter Van der Bijl
125, Dudley Nourse 103, Alan Melville 78)
(Reg
Perks 5/100, Hedley Verity 2/97)
England: 1st Innings : 316/10 (Leslie Ames 84, Eddie Paynter 62, Len Hutton
38)
(Eric Dalton 4/89, Chud Langton 3/71)
South Africa: 2nd
Innings : 481/10 (Alan Melville 103, Pieter Van del Bijl 97, Bruce Mitchell 89)
(Ken Farnes 4/74, Doug Wright
3/146)
England: 2nd Innings : 654/5
(Bill Edrich 219, Wally Hammond 140, Paul Gibb 120)
(Eric Dalton 2/100, Bruce Mitchell 1/133)
Match drawn with England needing
42 to win with five wickets in hand and first innings top scorer Leslie Ames at
crease batting on 17.
Both sides claimed that they
would have won the test had the rain not played spoilsport at Tea on Day10.
The England total of 654/5 is the
highest total by any team in 4th innings of a test and it is
doubtful if it can ever be bettered.
For further details about the
match and some good commentary
No comments:
Post a Comment