The BCCI, Indian cricket and the issue of transparency

N Srinivasan

Today, sport has emerged as a multi-billion dollar industry which attracts billions of viewers across the world. The application of the modern management tools and techniques has a made a significant change in the pattern of production, management and consumption of the sporting entities.

Cricket in India is not an exception. The successful application of this mechanism has made the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) one of the richest sporting bodies of the world. The continuous flow of revenue increases the responsibility of making these organizations transparent and accountable to the public.

However, recent incidents, which took place in BCCI, have raised questions on the transparency of this organization. The objective of this article is to discuss some of these incidents in the light of the codes of good governance.

The first incident was evolving around the IPL. In his report, Justice Mukul Mudgal indicated that some of the matches of IPL were fixed. Apart from the outsiders, some of the ‘insiders’ were also involved in betting and fixing scandals. The biggest culprit of this entire episode is Gurunath Meiyappan, who is the ‘son-in-law’ of the President of BCCI, Mr. N. Srinivasan, and probably the biggest ‘cricket enthusiast’ of the country.

Gurunath was believed to be one of the owners of Chennai Super Kings who was involved in making game strategies sitting on the team bench during the matches. Being the owner of the team, Gurunath was in a position to influence the results of the matches of his team.

It was indicated that he was involved in betting in favour of and against his own team. However, despite carrying out a detailed investigation to unleash the truth, attempts are being made by an influential part of the cricket administration in India to suppress the facts. These attempts are against the ethical conduct of the business.

A transparent organization should provide more and more information either voluntarily or to abide by the law to maintain transparency and accountability. BCCI’s recent behaviour does not support this code of ethical conduct.

The second issue involves the captain of Indian cricket team MS Dhoni, and his relation to a sports management company, Rhiti Sports. It was indicated that Dhoni was the 15% stakeholder of the company. However, the company claimed that sweat equity of 10-15% was given to Dhoni against outstanding receipts.

In this context, it should be noted that Rhiti Sports manages the business deals of Dhoni and other cricketers. This kind of relation may influence the selection of players for the national squad which is against the interest of the national team. To prevent this ‘conflict of interest’, a number of recommendations are made by the Mudgal Committee which include the following three points:

i) The players’ agents should not be allowed to travel with the team or to stay in the same hotel with the team.

ii) Players should not be allowed to own any stake or interest in any players’ agency or company associated with cricket unless the interest is in the nature of endorsement or sponsorship.

iii) The interest mentioned in point ii should be intimated to the BCCI by the player within 15 days of its occurrence.

It may be expected that these recommendations will strongly be implemented by the BCCI to maintain a clean image of its players.

Mr. N. Srinivasan, the President of BCCI, is also involved in ‘conflict of interest’ issue. Mr. Srinivasan is playing the roles of the President of BCCI as well as the owner of one of the IPL franchisees, Chennai Super Kings. A person, who is holding both these positions, may influence the selection of the players for the national teams, promote the cause of the franchisee through the national team or even influence the result of a match in favour of his franchisee.

The players’ auction may also be controlled by him. Hence, this issue of ‘conflict of interest’ should be solved at the earliest for the long term interest of cricket in India. However, no strong step is being taken till date to solve this matter.

BCCI, despite being the richest sports body in India, does not fully abide by the codes of transparency and accountability. This may impinge upon the credibility of the organization and the game in long run. Therefore, strong steps should be made to make this organization transparent. We may expect a proactive approach from the major stakeholders of Indian cricket for making the image of the game clean in India.