BCCI can't escape blame for making 'gentlemen' into pit bulls
by Natteri Adigal
Although Harbhajan Singh is a popular member of its Mumbai Indians team, for whom Reliance Industries had paid a fortune, the company is unlikely to flex muscles and engage bright lawyers, like BCCI had done once, to get the verdict reversed.A DAY before handing down the 11-match ban on off-spinner, Harbhajan Singh, for his role in the ugly incident on April 25, involving Sreesanth at Mohali, match referee, Farokh Engineer, remarked, “Indian Premier League (IPL) has taken cricket to a different level. We certainly do not wish to tarnish our image by anything on or off-field.”
Bhajji had led the costliest team of the tournament, in the absence of Sachin Tendulkar, to its third successive defeat and was understandably in an awkward mood when the Punjab Kings player ostensibly consoled him for his bad luck. It seemed that the ‘foul-mouthed’ spinner celebrated for his filthy remarks during the game, had swapped roles with the ‘belligerent’ Sreesanth, noted for his unseemly provocations, targetted at rival players on-field.
Board of Control for Cricket in India’s (BCCI’s) chief administrative officer, Ratnakar Shetty, has indicated that Singh may face more music from the Board when the a separate show cause notice is answered. After all, he happens to be a contracted player of the BCCI, although he may be playing for IPL. He is still bound by the code of conduct of BCCI, Shetty said.
It is quite possible that Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) is even more worried about its image. The company cannot afford to be associated with such a controversy. Although Singh is a popular member of its Mumbai Indians team, for whom it had paid a fortune, it is unlikely to flex muscles and engage bright lawyers, like BCCI had done once to get the verdict reversed.
Ironically, Sreesanth has been let off with a warning even though it was he who had started the spat. Shetty agrees that it was not his first offence. He said, “I had written a letter to Sreesanth asking him to refrain from antics on the field in the name of aggression. I said that people like Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly, Rahul Dravid and Laxman are all aggressive but through their performances, not through cheap antics.”
Maintaining that he had walked up to Singh after the match only to shake hands with him, Sreesanth wondered, “I don’t know the reason. Maybe because of the three (IPL) defeats in a row, Singh was very angry.” The Keralite lad, who had become a sobbing cry baby in front of TV cameras after the ‘slap’ he received, told a Malayalam TV channel, Asianet News, “I had gone to shake hands but it was really like hitting me. It was really a scuffle.” He had not called the handshake on the wrong side as a ‘slap’ as most media persons reported. The word ’malppidutham’ refers to wrestling, grappling or scuffle. But, he smartly continued, “It should not have happened. But I have forgiven…because I am the only Malyali in the team. I have my playing days ahead of me. I don’t keep these things in my mind. I just don’t carry all these things.” Significantly, Singh had pleaded, “I have no malice towards Sreesanth and whatever happened did not come from any ill intention.” Former captain and noted commentator, Krishnamachari Srikkanth, reacted, “A senior cricketer like him (Singh) should have realised what he was doing. He almost got away with it in Australia because the entire team backed him. But it cannot happen every time and as a captain of the team, he should have acted more responsibly.”
BCCI secretary, Niranjan Shah, has denied that the Board had issued any formal gag order to the team managements about going to the media. He, however, added, “But, this is a disciplinary issue concerning the players and the players are contracted to BCCI. There is no need for anyone else to talk in this matter.”
To an unbiased observer, it does seem that the game, once considered to be played by ‘gentlemen’, has been brought to this pass by none other than BCCI itself. Quite unlike the restraint shown by the RIL team, the Board had, only three months back, encouraged rowdy behaviour by the same player, that too on international turf. BCCI’s handling of a similar ugly incident at Sydney in January was a clear example of bullying by the Indian Board.
Sharad Pawar, the BCCI godfather, had said he had been handed the authority to recall the Indian team on his own half way through a contracted tour of Australia. He said he would not hesitate to use that if the appeal against the three-match ban on Bhajji did not get ’satisfactory’ results. “I will only use the power in support of Singh for the rest of the country,” Pawar had told the Herald Sun. “There will be an ICC committee hearing. We are confident that in the hearing, he will be cleared. Let’s see what happens, but allegations of racism against a member of our cricket team are not acceptable,” he added.
As it finally turned out, Vasha R Manohar, a legal eagle ‘reputed’ for saving billionaire clients charged with serious offences from Indian judiciary for a fat fee, was engaged to cast a magic spell on the appeals commissioner, John Hansen – a high court judge of New Zealand. He famously convinced the judge that Singh used abusive words in Hindi and not the racial abuse, ‘big monkey’. And the derogatory reference to the adversary’s mother was quite common in India!
Moreover, ICC was obviously manipulated to inform the commissioner of just one previous conviction, instead of four. The judge himself elaborated that despite downgrading the racial abuse charge, Singh could still have faced a ban had ICC supplied full details of his previous convictions.
Thanks to the bullying by BCCI, even cricketing legend and ICC member, Gavaskar, got down from his exalted position by getting muddled in extraneous issues. His remarks directed against professional umpires of ICC was like the president of India slamming its armed forces of the country being biased in taking action against saboteurs!
Four months back, BCCI’s worthies failed to realise that backing Singh just because he was an Indian player – irrespective of what he did in the eyes of the concerned authorities – could have dangerous consequences in Indian society. Impressionable cricket watching kids started getting the message that belligerent behaviour and uttering expletives would earn even more fame and money than masterly cricket. BCCI must realise at least now that cricket cannot be equated to dogfighting with specially bred pit bull terriers. That can earn a lot of money in gambling rings but it is not honourable for human beings.
No comments:
Post a Comment