Why the Indian cricket board should be run the British way

BCCI operates like a secret society unlike the English Cricket Board's transparent corporate style

The Lodha committee received Deloitte’s audit reports of the financial statements of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and various state cricket associations in India in late January after calling for them in November 2016. Amicus curiae Gopal Subramanian reportedly told the country’s highest court that Deloitte had found large-scale financial irregularities in most of the accounts submitted to the Lodha panel. This was on the day the Supreme Court appointed a four-member panel headed by former Comptroller and Auditor General of India Vinod Rai to temporarily run BCCI till the house could be put in order.

A solution to make BCCI accountable to the public could be to corporatise it. The board can take a leaf out of the books of England & Wales Cricket Board (ECB) and Cricket Australia. Unlike BCCI and various organisations run as registered societies, the ECB and all 38 counties in England are run as corporations. Cricket Australia (CA), too, was registered as a corporation in 1982 in Victoria and under Australian laws has to file audited financial statements every year. BCCI, being a ‘charitable society’ in contrast doesn’t have to follow strict financial rules.

ECB was incorporated as a company in 1996 and has since regularly filed its accounts with the UK’s regulators. All of the 38 county boards also registered themselves as limited companies. Every one of them, be it the cash-rich Surrey cricket board or the more modest Cheshire cricket board, publicly discloses its financial statements.

Although BCCI is registered as a charity but rarely does any, ECB also has a charitable arm. But this one is a company limited by guarantee and needs to disclose its audited financials. Called the English and Wales Cricket Trust, it receives contributions from the ECB and makes some money from its own investing activities which are then distributed to various county clubs and for various cricket development activities across England and Wales. The ultimate parent holding company of the trust, incorporated in 2005, is England and Wales Cricket Board Ltd. 

For instance, the trust’s 2014-15 accounts show it had received £32 million as donations from its holding company that runs ECB. In 2015-16, it did not receive anything. In 2013-14, it had received £12 million in donations from the ECB.

ECB has been regularly funding the trust through its revenues since 2005. ECB’s accounts show that it had recorded a record turnover of £174 million in the year it made the £32-million donations to the trust.

The key difference between how the game is administered in India and in England also lies in the fact that the British government funds the trust every year. Every year, a body called Sport England gives several million pounds to the trust which are then passed on to county boards or invested in cricket development activities. Sport England is run by the British government’s department for media, culture and sport. All the funds given by Sport England are funded by the British taxpayer.

The trust received £3 million in 2014-15 from Sport England. In 2015-16, the donation from Sport England was around £4.6 million. All these donations are restricted in nature and can only be used for the purpose for which they are given. The trust’s financial statements show that from the Sport England donations in 2015-16, it gave £4.2 million to 39 county boards (including one from Wales) to cover their running costs and organise competitions across all age groups. The remaining money was given to a cricketing charity called Chance to Shine. In 2014-15, out of the Sport England donations, money was given to yet another institution named Lords’ Taverners. County clubs were also given money to buy cricketing equipment during that year.

But it’s not just ECB’s own income and the taxpayer’s money that lubricates the trust that funds domestic county cricket in England. One of the donors to the trust was Waitrose, the sponsor of the English cricket team. The British supermarket chain, whose logo is emblazoned prominently on the jersey of all England players, donated £236,500 to the trust in 2015-16. The money, again classified as restricted funds, was used to purchase equipment for the maintenance of cricket grounds across England.

All the county boards that receive these funds are also registered as limited companies and publicly disclose their financial statements. But not every board complies with regulations. For instance, Middlesex Cricket Board Ltd, with its registered address at the Lords cricket stadium in London, hasn’t disclosed its account details since 2014-15. The government initiated a strike-off action against the board in January 2016. The board managed to give a reason for non-compliance and action was discontinued against it a couple of months later. While there may be aberrations like Middlesex, others usually ensure compliance.

All these financial statements are duly audited. In fact, ECB’s statements are audited by KPMG. In India, as Justice Lodha pointed out, most of the state cricket associations sent hand-written book entries when asked for audited financial statements.

In India, the corporatisation of cricket has been synonymous with the advent of the controversy-embroiled India Premier League and cosmetic changes in BCCI’s administrative monikers. The real corporatisation of Indian cricket will happen when the administration and its financial dealings are honest, transparent and open to public scrutiny.