Transparency is the buzzword in the BCCI these days. With a Supreme Court panel hanging a sword over the powers that be, everything is done with an eye on getting the optics right.
So you had an eminent panel of former cricketers, greats really, coming together to recommend a name (s) to the BCCI bosses for the post of head coach. But what the entire process did was to show the fault lines in Indian cricket.
If the end objective was to get former cricketers get involved in the process of selecting the coach without the Board interference, well then the methodology adopted was fine. But just having eminent cricketers in positions of power is not enough, the chosen names should also have the professional bent of mind.
The Process Was Hurried
Right from the start the process was a bit hurried.
The Indian team was knocked out of the World Twenty20 on 31 March, but the process to source applications started towards the end of the Indian Premier League (IPL). Then the BCCI waited till 15 June to outline the process of appointing the head coach and the panel got a week to decide on the potential head coach.
Why This Hurry?
Why could this process not have started during the IPL? At least it could have carried on in the background so that it could have given opportunities for all concerned to prepare and present their case in person.
Today Ravi Shastri and Sourav Ganguly are pointing fingers at each other. Maybe if there was a clear marked out date with all candidates being asked to arrive at a particular time to present their credentials, it would have been more transparent.
Instead with the panel getting just a week to make their choice, it was all a bit rushed. Only three of the shortlisted seven got an opportunity to make a presentation in person, while the others had to be present virtually. Also one of the members of the selection panel, Sachin Tendulkar, was away holidaying in London.
.jpg?auto=format%2Ccompress&fmt=webp&width=720)
When the BCCI Should Have Stepped In
This is where the BCCI should have stepped in and chosen a date for all to be present at the same place and at the same time. What could be more important than choosing the head coach of the Indian cricket team? Could the applicants and the selectors not give up a day’s leisure for an important cricketing decision?
In the defence of both Ganguly and Shastri, with the selection panel getting just a week, they could not have changed their plans. The Cricket Association of Bengal (CAB) working committee was notified a week before the the process was outlined. Similarly, Shastri had been on a holiday for a longer while.
.jpg?auto=format%2Ccompress&fmt=webp&width=720)
Delay in Process Ensured the Mess
By letting the entire process drift till mid-June, there was bound to be a mess and such outpouring of emotions in the end was only expected.
Without the pressure of being seen to be transparent, in 2000 when the BCCI started choosing coaches via a process it was much clearer. John Wright, Greg Chappell and Geoff Marsh arrived in Chennai, made presentations and left. The board had a clear date and time for a panel headed by Raj Singh Dungarpur to choose Wright.
Similarly in 2005 when there was no urge to get the optics right, the BCCI panel including Shastri, Sunil Gavaskar with Jagmohan Dalmiya chose Chappell from amongst other candidates like Tom Moody, Desmond Haynes and Mohinder Amarnath in full media glare in New Delhi.
In 2007 too, Graham Ford and John Emburey were called to Chennai to be interviewed again with selector Shastri being present in person along with the others. Ford accepted the offer, only to change his mind later. It was this Ford snub that forced BCCI to pull down the shutters while choosing Gary Kirsten and Duncan Fletcher as coaches.
Perhaps it was Shastri’s experience of being a coach selector and of being present in person which forced the emotional outburst from the gregarious former Indian captain.
Is Ganguly a Soft Target?
But perhaps Ganguly is a soft target. He was allowed by the BCCI to skip an important interview to enable him to attend the CAB meeting. Shouldn’t Shastri’s ire be directed towards the powers that be instead of Ganguly? Afterall, Ganguly sought and obtained permission to skip an interview.
Today as the Supreme Court resumes its hearing on the verdict of the Lodha panel recommendations, it would have noted that as per the diktat an eminent panel of cricketers took an important decision of appointing another eminent cricketer as head coach. But surely that does not mean ends justify means.
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)