ICL AND AFTER

The Indian Cricket League has displayed its colours, with a line-up of former internationals and a few domestic players. The common thread - all of them have little or no chance of making it to the national side. Same with the line-up from abroad. The likes of Inzamam-ul-Haq, Lance Klusener and Chris Harris are on the wrong side of their careers. The only consolations being the mercurial Brian Lara and Mohammad Yousuf, who only a year ago was on a record-breaking spree in test cricket.

In the ICL there is no single feaure attracting fans to a particular team, with all the teams being artificial creations. There is no nationality basis, no regional basis and no city/area basis from which sprang a Manchester United fan, a Los Angeles Lakers fan or a New York Knicks fan.

Will this declining army shake the foundations of world cricket? Three decades ago, another TV magnate did exactly that. But Kerry Packer had USPs galore. Money for the players and innovations like coloured clothing, white balls and night cricket. All of which are here to stay.

The lure of the Packer lucre attracted most of the leading players of Australia, England, West Indies, Pakistan and South Africa. But Subhash Chandra and the ICL does not have a single USP to boast of. Also, unlike then, the 'official' side has enough financial muscle.

The BCCI this week declared a net profit of Rs 232 crore for the previous financial year. So why is it running scared? Just plain fear that their authority will be eroded and the bottomlines slimmer.

BCCI could easily have co-existed with ICL, considering the 'rebel' league simply does not have the wherewithal to compete with international cricket, especially if it involves India. If there is a clash in timings, it's just a matter of BCCI making it clear to the players where their priorities lie. And of course, the money is where Team India is.

Even if the Board was so intent on banning the ICL stars, they could easily have come out with more moolah for domestic cricket and better marketing initiatives much earlier. We already have one-day tournaments and it's not too difficult to come up with Twenty20 events.

ICL had raised its head in May, giving the world's richest cricket body enough and more time to chart out a detailed counter-strategy. But in their quest for money, foreign coach and President Sharad Pawar's bid to be ICC President, domestic cricketers were nowhere on the radar. Out of their 232-crore booty, if the Board had acted faster on pumping more money into domestic cricket, some of the 'rebel' cricketers may not have taken the plunge.

The ICL launch is a necessary wake-up call for this profit-grabbing club, and if this lessens the huge gulf between international and domestic cricket, Indian cricket will be the beneficiary.

As for Kapil Dev, the board sacked him as National Cricket Academy chairman saying,"You can't have a foot in both camps."

One can argue Kapil was busy plotting for the ICL, while he was supposed to groom talented youngsters. But instead of harping at the speck in Kapil Dev's eye, will the BCCI ever look at the plank in their eye?

Shouldn't an organisation with such humungous funds be more accountable? How about running it professionally like England, Australia or New Zealand? And more importantly, shouldn't Sharad Pawar be paying more attention to the Agriculture Ministry? How about devoting more time to finding a lasting solution to farmer suicides in his own state Maharashtra?