Eleven Gods and a Billion Indians Read online

  ELEVEN GODS

  AND A

  BILLION INDIANS

  ELEVEN GODS

  AND A

  BILLION INDIANS

  THE ON AND OFF THE FIELD

  STORY OF CRICKET IN INDIA AND BEYOND

  Boria Majumdar

  For Sharmistha—we have shared the dressing room for two decades!

  PROLOGUE

  Not Just a Sport

  20 March 2017. The last and final day of the Ranchi Test match between India and Australia, with the series tied at 1–1. Australia is overnight 23 for 2 and still trailing by 129 runs after a monumental effort by Cheteshwar Pujara and Wriddhiman Saha had given India a 152-run lead in the first innings. The ball is turning and spinning off the rough and most people following the match feel that with R. Ashwin and Ravindra Jadeja bowling brilliantly, India can take a series defining 2–1 lead, with only the fourth and final Test at Dharamshala remaining. Unlike what the norm is these days with regard to Test matches, there is serious interest in this one—and the series in general—owing to the fierce competitiveness exhibited by both teams through the high-octane cricket the series has produced so far. Australia’s captain Steven Smith’s ‘brain fade’ and his Indian counterpart Virat Kohli’s veiled attack that called his opposite number a cheat (without ever using the word, though) added to the excitement, with the Australian papers going to the extent of calling Kohli the ‘Donald Trump of cricket’.

  It was just how an India–Australia series should be. Intense, passionate and, at times, over the top.

  At about 8 a.m. in the morning, I noticed a couple of missed calls from a very senior official of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), the governing body of the game in the country. I had put in a formal request to interview one or two of the players at the end of the series and assumed he was calling in that regard. The official in question had conducted the affairs of the BCCI with efficiency since the Supreme Court had appointed a Committee of Administrators (CoA) to oversee the BCCI’s functioning on 30 January 2017 and, contrary to peoples’ expectations, there had been very few hiccups in the running of the sport. When I returned the call, he picked up after one ring, stating: ‘We have sent a detailed note to the ICC [International Cricket Council], which is now in the public domain. Do take a look. It lists our objections to the proposed financial redistribution plan and spells out why we are opposed to it. It will also show you that we are committed to protecting the BCCI’s interests at any cost, contrary to what is being said by some in the media.’

  Under normal circumstances, it would have been absolutely fine for him to tell me what he did. He knew I had an interest in the subject. He was doing his job and was committed to upholding Indian interests at the ICC, the global governing body of the game. However, with the India–Australia Test match poised for a very interesting finish, I expected him to, at the very least, mention the match, or refer to it in some form. But he did not. And, to be honest, it wasn’t surprising.

  The Test match, suffice to say, wasn’t his priority. Yes, India was playing Australia in one of the most high-profile Test series of our times but the BCCI was pre-occupied with other, what they called, ‘pressing concerns’.

  They were concerned about votes, threats to other boards, obtaining a few hundred million dollars more at the ICC and holding on to power.

  To write an accurate historical account of Indian cricket one needs to first understand that it is not simply a history of what is happening on the field. That is only a part of it. What is played off the field is equally important and fascinating. These two stories, which run concurrently on and off the field, make Indian cricket what it is. Unless one is able to comprehend and make sense of both these strands, running parallel to each other, one wouldn’t be able to fathom why the BCCI official did not refer to the India–Australia Test in the course of that conversation.

  It is important to take readers a little further back to elucidate upon this point. Jagmohan Dalmiya, the then BCCI president and arguably one of India’s best sports administrators of all time, had just passed away in Kolkata after a sudden deterioration in his condition on 20 September 2015. It had come as a shock to everyone, and people had started flocking to the B.M. Birla Heart Research Center in Alipore to pay their last respects. Former India captain Sourav Ganguly, a very close friend of the family, was one of the first to arrive at the hospital and was playing a key role in overseeing how events leading up to performing of the last rites should move from thereon. That’s when a fairly well-known figure in the Indian cricketing circles came up to him and said, ‘You need to take over the reins of the Cricket Association of Bengal [CAB] now if you are keen. This is your best chance.’ Ganguly’s face contorted with disgust the moment the statement was made. He chose not to respond and when we made eye contact a few seconds later, I realized he was upset and frustrated. That it was still bothering him was evident when he later said to me, ‘Mr Dalmiya’s body is still here. It is not even one hour since the tragedy and look what people are saying! It is just unfortunate.’

  It was, indeed but, as Ganguly knew well, it was typical of the Indian cricketing world.

  Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

  The next morning, Mr Dalmiya’s body was kept at his Alipore home until about midday for people to come and pay their respects. Almost everyone from the BCCI turned up. Anurag Thakur, the then BCCI secretary, was one of the first officials to visit and he conducted himself with the utmost dignity and integrity. Avishek Dalmiya, Mr Dalmiya’s son and now the secretary of the CAB, came up to me in the course of the morning and mentioned that a number of senior BCCI office-bearers were on their way to pay their respects. Each of them was coming to Eden Gardens, Mr Dalmiya’s second home, from where the family would then proceed to the cremation grounds. A huge crowd had gathered at Eden Gardens and it was heartening to see the chief minister of West Bengal, Ms Mamata Banerjee, accord Mr Dalmiya a 21-gun salute for his services to Indian sport. It was a fitting tribute for all he had done for cricket in this country. Moments before the national anthem was played, the entire BCCI top brass had reached Eden Gardens and, having performed the last courtesy, retreated to the home team’s dressing room at the ground level of the club house. The conversation there, in the presence of one of the CAB joint secretaries, was all about who will succeed Mr Dalmiya and how it was important to stop N. Srinivasan from trying to make a comeback.

  Outside, the gun salute was being offered to the just-departed BCCI president while inside his colleagues were busy plotting their next move to replace him. Again, it wasn’t surprising to witness these contrasting scenes, for that’s how Indian cricket has been governed for years. The Board has evolved into an INR 20,000-crore behemoth and thanks to the super-lucrative Indian Premier League (IPL), the control of Indian cricket has become one of the most coveted professions in the country.

  However, this is not to say that the two strands I mentioned earlier, which run parallel, do not feed off each other or come to a head on occasion. Indeed, they do. All the time. On 6 January 2017, only days after the Supreme Court verdict had changed the face of the BCCI, ousting the president and the secretary and disqualifying many others, the Indian team for the one-day international (ODI) and T20I series against England was due to be selected. With M.S. Dhoni stepping down from captaincy, the selectors also needed to formally appoint Virat Kohli as captain across all three formats of the game. Given that this series against England was to be the last ODI assignment before the ICC Champions Trophy in June, it had assumed far more significance than any run-of-the-mill bilateral ODI contest. Selections were scheduled to be convened at around 1 p.m. at t
he Cricket Centre in Mumbai. Just minutes before the process was about to start, news trickled in that the meeting had been delayed. For the first few minutes it wasn’t clear what was causing the delay. Only later did it become known that the Board’s joint secretary, Amitabh Chaudhury, who, at that point, was understood to have been ousted by the Supreme Court verdict, had called Rahul Johri, the CEO, stating that he was the convenor of the meeting in the absence of Ajay Shirke, the secretary (who had also been ousted). It was also mentioned he would only reach Mumbai that evening to convene the selection committee. Why Chaudhury did what he did is not known. Even if he wanted to convene the meeting, logic states he should have been in Mumbai. He was very much in the know that the selection meeting had been scheduled on that day and there could be nothing more important for the Board’s office-bearers than selecting the national team.

  On receiving his call, Johri, who had been asked by the Supreme Court-appointed Lodha Committee to convene and preside over the meeting, contacted the secretary of the Lodha Committee, advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, for advice. Even though Chaudhury was disqualified to preside over the meeting, only upon being told by Sankaranarayanan that he could proceed with the meeting did it go on. While this entire drama was being played out, the selectors, led by M.S.K. Prasad, were waiting in a room on the third floor of the Cricket Centre awaiting clarity. In all, they had to wait for a little under three hours before they could finally select the team. Two of the selectors, while not wanting their names to be revealed, confirmed that they had received calls from a few BCCI office-bearers threatening them not to go ahead with the meeting. Eventually, the meeting, which was to start at 1 p.m., started at 3 p.m. and the formal announcement of Kohli being appointed as captain of the ODI team happened at 4 p.m.

  There were, however, other aspects to the drama. Just around the time that the selection committee meeting was about to start, the BCCI received a notification from the Tamil Nadu Cricket Association stating they were unable to offer grounds for the India– England U-19 series that was to be held in February 2017. The timing of this communication is of significance. Whether it was deliberately sent at the same time or was simply a matter of coincidence will never be known. But the communication was enough to add to the confusion and throw the administrators off gear.

  Even after the meeting was over, a section of the ousted BCCI office-bearers were of the opinion that the team selection had been illegal and wanted to move court for further clarification on the matter. However, good sense ultimately prevailed and the move was scuttled. Else, the Supreme Court would also have had to decide if Kohli should captain Team India!

  Despite all the drama off the field, two things have remained constant for a while. One: India’s performance. The team has done well consistently, very well in home conditions, in fact, and has shown signs of being competitive overseas under Kohli’s leadership. India made the semi-finals of the 2015 World Cup with commendable wins over Pakistan and South Africa, and put in impressive performances en route to beating Australia to make the semi-finals of the World T20 at home the following year. In Tests, India finished 2016–17 as the top-ranked team in the world, with series wins over the West Indies, New Zealand, England, Bangladesh and Australia. Thereafter, Kohli led India to the finals of the Champions Trophy in England in June 2017, and an impressive ODI series win in South Africa in February 2018.

  Off the field, there seems to be a semblance of order behind all the chaos. At the time of the appointment of the CoA by the Supreme Court on 30 January 2017, the first concern voiced—by the public and the media alike—was how these people, who had little or no experience in administering the game, would run cricket in India. Could a motley bunch of four individuals, among whom only one had a cricketing background, ensure that action continued without a hitch? Was the CoA capable of conducting tournaments like the IPL? Added to these apprehensions was the issue of the CoA failing to protect India’s financial interests at the ICC. With the ICC intending to go ahead with the financial redistribution plan, first mooted in 2016 when Shashank Manohar took over the reins of the world body, this question was foremost in the minds of the former office-bearers ousted by the court, individuals who were out to prove their importance in the running of Indian cricket. Finally, it wasn’t clear amidst all this fluidity if the CoA and the Board’s chief executive officer (CEO) would be able to inspire confidence in marketers to invest in Indian cricket going forward. This concern became acute when industry leaders like Star India declared their intention not to bid for a renewal of the shirt sponsorship rights for the national team, a property that had been with them for the past four years. With key tournaments like the Champions Trophy round the corner, and the on-field performance of the team at its best ever, Star India’s declaration to not participate in the tender was surprising but, as later expressed by its CEO, Uday Shankar, largely driven by the volatility surrounding the game in the country. Clearly, it was a test for the CoA and the professionals holding office in the BCCI to ensure that the most-followed sport in India didn’t run into a protracted state of financial and administrative stalemate.

  Defying all concerns, the Board managed to up the shirt sponsorship value by a whopping five times with OPPO Mobiles India, the smartphone manufacturer, stepping in to replace Star. The value, for the record, is four times what Cricket Australia (CA) gets from shirt sponsorship for its national team. The IPL auction was staged without a hitch in Bengaluru and, for the first time in years, the spectacle itself was conducted without any major controversy erupting during or in the immediate days following the close of the tenth edition of the tournament. The ICC–BCCI standoff, too, was eventually settled, with the BCCI managing to get a USD 405 million share from the ICC as per the new financial model—more than double of what the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB), the second-biggest earner, gets from cricket’s apex body. Above all, despite early apprehensions, the Indian team participated in the Champions Trophy without further drama. The moot point is that the BCCI’s operations never came to a standstill.

  However, this is not to suggest that the going was always smooth; that has never been the case with Indian cricket. The day India landed in England, under the stewardship of captain Kohli and head coach Anil Kumble, to defend the Champions Trophy title, an announcement seeking a new head coach for team India was made. This came at the back of a story that all was not well between the captain and the coach. Despite emphatic on-field performances, Kohli and Kumble weren’t getting along, and sources within the BCCI suggested there had hardly been any communication between the two of them for months. Kumble, who was initially keen on an extension, was informed by the CoA that they were left with little option but to open a new search and the issues between the captain and the coach needed to be settled before an extension was possible. While much of it (in fact, all of it) was already out in the media, the BCCI acting secretary Amitabh Chaudhary, upon landing in England, dismissed the whole episode as media speculation, even trying to suggest that it was the media that had cooked up the story and was now blowing it out of proportion. Within days of Chaudhary’s denial, Ramachandra Guha, member of the CoA, resigned from his position, citing the treatment meted out to Kumble as one of the reasons. His media statement was a formal ratification of the crisis. Guha, who made some pertinent points in his note, should have been questioned about the timing of his resignation. With the team in England, in the middle of the second-most important cricket tournament in the world, he may have waited a week or two before making his frustrations public. Things came to a head when members of the BCCI’s Cricket Advisory Committee were forced to meet in London, right after India’s match against Sri Lanka, to deliberate on the next coach. India had lost to a much-lesser Sri Lankan side and to suggest that the dressing room hadn’t been impacted by the goings-on and had remained insulated was unreasonable. How could the players not have been impacted by an ongoing public spat between their captain and the coach? How could they not have been bothere
d when the search for a new head coach was on in the middle of the Champions Trophy? How could they have kept their focus on the task at hand?

  To their credit, Kohli and the boys put up a brilliant performance against South Africa at the Oval on 11 June and made the semi-finals in style. Thereafter, India stormed past Bangladesh in Birmingham to make their second consecutive Champions Trophy final. Yet again, Indian cricket was continuing to surprise one and all. The team, despite issues in the dressing room, was showing no signs of discomfort on the field and was getting ready to play Pakistan in a much-hyped final. Players were in denial mode, at least publicly, and even a meeting between the captain and the Cricket Advisory Committee—consisting of Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and V.V.S. Laxman—to try to diffuse the captain–coach crisis a day before the final was considered par for the course. It was only after India lost to Pakistan did most people revisit the dressing-room crisis and suggest that the Kohli–Kumble rift wasn’t possibly the best thing to have happened in the middle of the tournament. Kumble, who resigned a day after the Champions Trophy final, alluded to his deteriorating association with Kohli in a post on social media, stating that the relationship had become ‘untenable’. His assertion led to an instant outburst, with the captain being trolled on Twitter as an egotist and control freak. Coming on the back of the defeat in the final, people decided to take pot-shots at Kohli, without knowing his side of the story or what had really transpired to push things beyond repair. The team was subsequently on its way to the West Indies and did so without a head coach. In the series that followed, India once again played quality cricket to defeat the West Indies 3–1 on their soil in the five-match ODI series to seal yet another away series victory. The coach hunt was on alongside, and there was speculation that the team had communicated its preference to the BCCI.