A K Bhattacharya: Ganguly and Advani - In the same boat

NEW DELHI DIARY

This is not a piece in defence of either Sourav Ganguly or Lal Krishna Advani. The fate of both has been more or less sealed. Whatever may be the final outcome of the process initiated by the high-level review committee of the Board of Cricket Control of India (BCCI) on Tuesday, Mr Ganguly's days as the skipper of the Indian cricket team are numbered.

Similarly, Mr Advani has already bowed under pressure and announced his plan to step down as the president of the Bharatiya Janata Party by December this year.

The purpose of this exercise is to draw attention to a perspective that has been largely ignored while analysing the unseemly battle Mr Ganguly and Mr Advani have been engaged in during the last few months in their respective spheres.

It would be naïve to see these developments just as a battle between the skipper of the Indian cricket team and its newly appointed foreign coach, on the one hand, and between the head of India's main opposition political party and its parent organisation, on the other. These are not just battles between two personalities.

More importantly, these are battles being fought to retain or change the existing power structure.The exit of Mr Ganguly and Mr Advani will mean a clear shift in that power structure and, therefore, has obvious implications for the future.

But before getting into that, it is necessary to know why a cricket captain is being compared to a political party leader. Consider the recent career graph of the two leaders and you will know the reasons.

Mr Ganguly took charge of the cricket team amidst controversy (the betting scandal had just savaged the reputation of many an Indian cricketer) and the growing realisation that the team's best batsman (Sachin Tendulkar) was not necessarily its best captain.

Sourav Ganguly did not take long to make a mark for himself""with his aggression on and off the field, emphasis on spotting new talents and persisting with them and with his innovative strategies on the field. In short, Mr Ganguly was the boss and wielded authority that few of his predecessors could enjoy.

What most of his detractors easily forgot was that Mr Ganguly earned that authority through results - by recording the largest number of wins. But what they also highlighted was his poor performance with the bat, which of course kept deteriorating with every series he played.

A new foreign coach by the name of Greg Chappell entered at this stage. It was clear from the beginning that Mr Chappell wanted to be the boss of the team, while Mr Ganguly felt that being the boss was his prerogative. What we saw in Zimbabwe was a reflection of that power struggle.

Mr Advani also took charge of the BJP at a critical stage. The party had lost power in the general elections. The choice to lead the BJP fell on Mr Advani, because of his seniority, his track record and the absence of any other strong contender.

But the problem arose when while Mr Advani wanted to explore a new vision for the party, the leaders of the Rashtriya Swamsevak Sangh (RSS) decided to guide the BJP leadership on what that vision ought to be.

The conflict between the RSS leadership and Mr Advani increased and the proverbial last straw on the camel's back was the latter's statement on Jinnah's secularism. This was also the time when the leadership struggle within the BJP had become intense.

The RSS leadership wanted to take advantage of that. Mr Advani's resignation drama was a reflection of that power struggle. Even though Mr Advani could retain his position as the BJP president, the die had been cast. The Chennai conference of the party laid down the road map for Mr Advani's exit.

It is clear that both the battles represented a struggle as to who will run the show. Greg Chappell saw in Sourav Ganguly a big obstacle to his desire to be the Indian cricket team's boss. And Sourav Ganguly, used as he was to calling the shots as the team captain, was perturbed that his powers were being curtailed. Similarly, Mr Advani's position must have been that he wanted the BJP to be run by its president and not be guided through diktats from the RSS.

The likely departure of Mr Ganguly and Mr Advani will mean a clear shift in this power equation. Whoever becomes the new captain of the Indian cricket team has to contend with a new reality where he may not be the boss of the team and not as powerful as his immediate predecessor was.

Similarly, whoever becomes the new president of BJP may have to respect the dominance of the RSS leadership. Thus, only changing the captain or the coach of the Indian cricket team or the president of BJP will not solve the problems these two entities are facing today.

It is important to outline the role, power and jurisdiction of the Indian cricket captain vis-à-vis his team and the coach, just as the new BJP president should be told how free he is from the RSS influence and how sovereign his leadership of the party and its affairs is. Without such clarity in the pecking order, the problems that afflicted the Indian cricket team and the BJP may surface once again.