 "Failed to see the rot in IPL")
There is no point laying the blame at the doorstep of Ravi Sawani, head of the Board of Control for Cricket in India's anti-corruption unit, for the IPL spot-fixing scandal involving three Rajasthan Royals players.
Appointed to the job on May 1, 2012, Sawani managed to finally assemble a team of four other officers only in January this year. His first job was to probe the spot-fixing allegations after an Indian news channel sting involving five Indian domestic players last year. A former cop, Sawani was at the core of investigation in the match-fixing scandal in 2000. He later joined the International Cricket Council (ICC) in the capacity of general manager with the Anti-Corruption and Security Unit (ACSU) for five years before coming to BCCI.
BCCI should have paid more attention to what Sawani's former ACSU boss, Sir Paul Condon, said when he quit the ICC. "IPL brings with it the biggest threat in terms of corruption in the game since the days of cricket in Sharjah." Why? "That familiarly heady cocktail of party atmosphere, entertainment, cricket and celebrity. And amid all that, we found that some of the bad old faces, who were involved in match-fixing a decade ago, started to reappear at grounds and hotels and wanted to get involved again," Condon told ICC in 2009.
The absence of any corporate governance structure at BCCI means there is never any accountability. It has always been reactive rather than pro-active about developments. High-handedness comes naturally to some of BCCI's brass. Even during his press conference last week, after the Delhi Police announced the arrest of S Sreesanth, Ajit Chandela and Ankit Chavan for alleged involvement in spot-fixing in IPL matches, BCCI President N Srinivasan never once owned up for his management team's mistakes or apologised for letting the fans down.
India had witnessed the first match-fixing scandal in 2000. Yet despite the growing evidence that cricket could never be foolproof, why did BCCI wait till 2012 to have its own anti-corruption unit, thus becoming the last board to do so? Even Pakistan, in the aftermath of the 2010 spot-fixing scandal involving Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir, had put in place a strict anti-corruption structure, making it mandatory for players to have only accredited agents.
In the absence of such basic infrastructure, it is not surprising that bookies can easily infiltrate the wafer-thin security cover and tempt players who have not received any formal education on the anti-corruption code. "Everyone says we have to educate them but players come from all walks of life, including some who cannot even sign in English. So how do you expect them to know about corruption?" asks the CEO of one of the bigger franchises.
Educating the player was a task that BCCI should have urgently undertaken, mainly because of the restricted powers of ACSU. Players should have been sensitised to methods bookies might employ to touch base, how they should respond and what punishments they could face in case they contravened laws. It didn't. This is where BCCI has failed the cricket lovers and the cricket set-up in India.
Appointed to the job on May 1, 2012, Sawani managed to finally assemble a team of four other officers only in January this year. His first job was to probe the spot-fixing allegations after an Indian news channel sting involving five Indian domestic players last year. A former cop, Sawani was at the core of investigation in the match-fixing scandal in 2000. He later joined the International Cricket Council (ICC) in the capacity of general manager with the Anti-Corruption and Security Unit (ACSU) for five years before coming to BCCI.
BCCI should have paid more attention to what Sawani's former ACSU boss, Sir Paul Condon, said when he quit the ICC. "IPL brings with it the biggest threat in terms of corruption in the game since the days of cricket in Sharjah." Why? "That familiarly heady cocktail of party atmosphere, entertainment, cricket and celebrity. And amid all that, we found that some of the bad old faces, who were involved in match-fixing a decade ago, started to reappear at grounds and hotels and wanted to get involved again," Condon told ICC in 2009.
Also Read
That was the year when IPL was being played in South Africa. Led by Lalit Modi at the time, IPL initially did not want ACSU to provide cover and made excuses, including about the "exorbitant" charge of $1.2 million. In 2008 Shah Rukh Khan was asked, at the behest of ACSU acting as observers, to step out of the Kolkata Knight Riders dugout. The interference of ACSU did not sit well with Modi's authoritarian lifestyle. It was with great reluctance that BCCI brought ACSU on board formally in 2010.
The absence of any corporate governance structure at BCCI means there is never any accountability. It has always been reactive rather than pro-active about developments. High-handedness comes naturally to some of BCCI's brass. Even during his press conference last week, after the Delhi Police announced the arrest of S Sreesanth, Ajit Chandela and Ankit Chavan for alleged involvement in spot-fixing in IPL matches, BCCI President N Srinivasan never once owned up for his management team's mistakes or apologised for letting the fans down.
India had witnessed the first match-fixing scandal in 2000. Yet despite the growing evidence that cricket could never be foolproof, why did BCCI wait till 2012 to have its own anti-corruption unit, thus becoming the last board to do so? Even Pakistan, in the aftermath of the 2010 spot-fixing scandal involving Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir, had put in place a strict anti-corruption structure, making it mandatory for players to have only accredited agents.
In the absence of such basic infrastructure, it is not surprising that bookies can easily infiltrate the wafer-thin security cover and tempt players who have not received any formal education on the anti-corruption code. "Everyone says we have to educate them but players come from all walks of life, including some who cannot even sign in English. So how do you expect them to know about corruption?" asks the CEO of one of the bigger franchises.
Educating the player was a task that BCCI should have urgently undertaken, mainly because of the restricted powers of ACSU. Players should have been sensitised to methods bookies might employ to touch base, how they should respond and what punishments they could face in case they contravened laws. It didn't. This is where BCCI has failed the cricket lovers and the cricket set-up in India.