E-Paper
Should be no confusion on forming players’ association
If you can’t fight them, join them is a wonderful euphemism for compromise. Indian cricketers understand this very well and some of the most influential players
If you can’t fight them, join them is a wonderful euphemism for compromise. Indian cricketers understand this very well and some of the most influential players have over the years become mouthpieces of the establishment, reaping rich rewards in return.
From time to time, efforts have been made to form an association that could air the genuine concerns of players and force the board to address cricketing issues without profits or power being the sole motive behind a decision.
These efforts failed, be it the Kapil Dev-led rebellion in the late eighties or the one led by the quartet of Ganguly-Tendulkar-Kumble-Dravid just before the 2003 World Cup. Since safeguarding personal interests rather than solving larger collective concerns of the players was the motive behind those moves, they were bound to fail, as they eventually did.
Today, as things stand, India is among the very few countries, apart from Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, which does not have a players’ association that is recognised by the Board.
The cricket board sees this as a trade union activity and is loath to give the players any representation in a decision-making body. The irony is that the international body, the ICC, headed by an Indian, recognises the international players’ body (FICA), but India does not.
This is to change soon as the Lodha panel recommendations have made it mandatory to have two players, one man and one woman, nominated by the players’ association, to become part of a nine-member apex council that will become the administrative wing of the Board.
To put this plan into action, the panel has recommended the formation of a steering committee –- Anil Kumble, Mohinder Amarnath and Diana Eduljee –- to oversee the formation of the association, which will have all former Test and first-class cricketers as members. Once formed, the two bodies (men and women) will then nominate two players to the apex body.
For this to take shape, the Lodha panel has set a deadline of September 30 for the board to form the steering committee and set the process in motion. According to the new set of deadlines given to the board, the two associations have to be in place by November 30. The onus of providing administrative support and finances for this purpose also lies with the Board.
The biggest hurdle even now is the lack of any will or initiative shown by the board to put this blueprint into action. They are still hoping against hope that a miracle happens in the Supreme Court and their review petition gets a positive response.
This resistance to accept the inevitable is resulting in a lot of confusion and players across the country are either unaware of this provision or are unsure of what lies ahead.
Some think this recommendation has to be implemented at the state level as well and are seeking clarity, which is not forthcoming.
The Lodha panel report makes it clear that there will be only two national-level associations, one for men and the other for women, whereas at the state level all local Test and first-class players are eligible to become members of their respective associations.
Only the board can sort out all this confusion, and before time runs out they better put a proper system in place so that the voice of the players and their genuine concerns are not once again thwarted.
