Jump to content

Supreme Court Asks BCCI To Implement Lodha Report In Full,BCCI To Reply In 4 Week


Recommended Posts

The stupid No ads recommendation will lead to Indian cricket losing most of its revenues and cricketers back to being paid peanuts specially at the first class level. And the Ex-cricketers can also die on the streets with no pension. We Can also forget about construction of more International grade stadiums needed in more parts of the country. 

Link to comment
 

 

 

 

 

 

I respect the Supreme Court, but some of their recommendations are objectionable. I don't want BCCI to become bankrupt in the near future.

It will mean that subscription charges of sports channels will reach sky high and PPV type charges also coming in.While the honourable judges looked at the fact that internationally ADs dont run in midst of events they forget that in India digitisation of cable Tv is low and hence there is under reporting of subscribers and subscription fee less too.

Most of these reccomendations are good,but they shouldnot have interfered regarding how and when BCCI must schedule matches and how they should negotiate commercial contracts etc.

 

This is what is being said

 

While it is learned the committee studied broadcast models adopted in countries like Australia and the UK, there is no reference in its report to broadcasting corporations in India being interviewed. "They didn't speak to companies like Star or Sony," the official said. "I don't know what input they have used [to arrive at the recommendations]."

Edited by Malcolm Merlyn
Link to comment
 

It will mean that subscription charges of sports channels will reach sky high and PPV type charges also coming in.While the honourable judges looked at the fact that internationally ADs dont run in midst of events they forget that in India digitisation of cable Tv is low and hence there is under reporting of subscribers and subscription fee less too.

Most of these reccomendations are good,but they shouldnot have interfered regarding how and when BCCI must schedule matches and how they should negotiate commercial contracts etc.

 

This is what is being said

 

Exactly, this is a tad unfair. Also the pressure on broadcasters will be immense. They give us quality coverage based on money and if that is hit, I am not sure what we can look at. 

Also ads are not that irritating to watch in all sports channels. I must say Star Sports is pretty good, but Ten Network is disappointing. But then Star owns majority of the rights.

Link to comment

Lodha report recommendations are an earthquake for BCCI - if implemented, Indian domestic cricket will take a completely new form.  Teams like Railways, Services etc will disappear into history.  So will Baroda, Saurashtra and Vidarbha.  Not sure if that's the right move.  

 

True.

Link to comment

Surprised to see very few comment of this topic from ICFers, may be BCCI is monitoring it :winky:,

Any way on the serious note I really want all this recommendations to be implemented by Supreme court not BCCI them selves, these are all very welcome changes and would make BCCI 100% professionally run organization and India will became no 1 cricketing country and stay at that position for long long time, these recommendation if implemented successfully under supreme court's eye could be land mark decision and other sports body could be made follow it by some one raising PIL etc... guys we are in for some exiting time with Indian Cricket and in the long run Sports in India as whole, don't worry about minor advertizement recommendation channels will fall in line in due time and find a way to earn from other medium, any way sports telecast is good but not the best in India compared lets say Aus where they are still better and introduce new things every few years that makes watching more interesting.

 

Link to comment

Lodha report recommendations are an earthquake for BCCI - if implemented, Indian domestic cricket will take a completely new form.  Teams like Railways, Services etc will disappear into history.  So will Baroda, Saurashtra and Vidarbha.  Not sure if that's the right move.  

 

DIdn't read the report. How will it happen?

Link to comment

Star Sports have tenatatively said that they will pay only 10cr per match instead of present 43cr if Lodha committee recommendations on advertisements are followed.BCCI will lose approx 1600cr per year.

The comedy is that in such a case the other boards will earn more money than BCCI when India tours them and those matches are telecasted in India.

This will simply kill Indian Cricket.

Someone needs to see the logic here rather than blindly follow recommendations of a committee.

Link to comment

While the ads thing is a little too extreme....they can do away with the ads while the match is going on...like showing ads in part of the screen etc.....they can go to ads after each over or when there is some kind of a stoppage no one cares....but showing ads when the actual gameplay is on is terrible.

Link to comment

Top ten recommendations: 

 

Here are the top 10 recommendations by the Lodha committee

 

# Not enough evidence against former IPL COO Sundar Raman, says Lodha

 

# Lodha panel wants BCCI to come under RTI Act

 

# Lodha panel recommends legalisation of betting

 

# Lodha panel proposes one person one post. Also no proxy voting of individuals

 

# No BCCI office-bearer can have more than two consecutive terms

 

# No BCCI office-bearer can be Minister or government servant, recommends Lodha panel

 

# In no case President will hold post for more than 2 years

 

# Lodha panel recommends a steering committee headed by former Home Secy G K Pillai with Mohinder

Amarnath, Diana Eduljee and Anil Kumble

 

# Panel recommends separate governing bodies for the IPL and BCCI

 

# Lodha Committee recommends relegation of Railways, Services and Universities as Associate members. They also lose voting rights

 

# Punishment and reforms were the main tasks for the Lodha committee

 

 

 

For details read: http://goo.gl/7lcjlg

 

                        : http://goo.gl/Rx0GHk

 

Right now discussion is going on on one state one vote recommendation and BCCI and many members are resisting it. According to them, many state in NE are not that cricket savvy while many portions of west india need to be divided into three state associations as they are the hot beds of cricket and I think they are right, But board thinks that the board loses transparency here. 

 

Be Objective, Transparent for Aspiring Youngsters: Supreme Court Tells BCCI

 

Apart from that selection process is also criticised. 

 

One-state, one-vote in BCCI will lead to internal politics, BCA tells Supreme Court  

Link to comment

This age limit thing is ridiculous.SC says since BCCI is dispensing a public function they should have a age limit just like SC judges retire at 65.Does the SC has the guts to say this to the politicians?Is this rule applied to other sporting federations?SC is just going beyond what its jurisdiction is.It has become a body above and beyond the constitution.No accountabilty has resulted into this.About time the judciary is made accountable.

 

The NEET order is another ticking bomb that the SC has set ticking.

 

@Mariyam

Link to comment
On 4/29/2016 at 1:58 PM, Mariyam said:

From a purely legal-ethical ( its not quite often that I hyphenate the two) perspective, there is no reason why the BCCI should come under the RTI Act.

And I ask, why not? Many state associations have become so corrupt, no one is accountable. These are are the steps to bring accountability and transparancy. Just read: 

 

Lodha Committee recommendations way forward for BCCI and Indian cricket

 

 

The script unfolded as expected. Most will agree it has exceeded expectations. The Justice Lodha Commission, appointed by the Supreme Court to help reform the BCCI, has recommended sweeping changes in the Board’s functioning, which, if implemented, will transform Indian cricket for all times to come. The moot question now is whether these recommendations are binding or not. If the BCCI is to be believed, they are not. The Lodha panel, however, feels that all of its recommendations will have to be implemented. The ultimate decision now rests with the Supreme Court and that’s when we will know what the final outcome of this entire process will look like.

Some of the recommendations are truly welcome. They follow the principles of good governance and have drawn upon practices from the International Olympic Committee (IOC) charter. It is good that age, term and tenure has been recommended by the Lodha panel. To see people heading state cricket associations for decades is the worst practice of all. Such a practice erodes accountability and turns an association in a monopoly or a cartel.

And there are many such associations within the BCCI, which have been headed by the same people for more than two decades. As in the IOC, it is good that the BCCI may now have a system by which no one can hold office for more than a cumulative nine years. Importantly, there has to be a ‘cooling off’ period after one term, which means no one person can be president for two consecutive terms.

That the committee has suggested no uniformity in subsidy for state associations is a serious recommendation. There are some associations in the country that are plagued with corruption. Some of them have no accountability in terms of how crores of rupees are spent. Goa, for example, does not have a stadium and a pathetic bank balance. The question is: what happened to the hundreds of crores of subsidy that was paid to the association over the last ten years? The same question can be asked of many other associations.

The other welcome recommendation is having zones for only tournaments. If the Lodha committee has its say, zones will no longer be relevant for nomination to the BCCI or for any standing committees. This means a 2013 repeat, where there was no election because all six South Zone units professed loyalty to N Srinivasan, will no longer be possible. In 2013, while a majority of the associations were opposed to Srinivasan, the Tamil Nadu Cricket Association strongman having all South Zone votes with him ensured that he could get elected unopposed.

Finally, that the state associations may now be subject to audit by the BCCI is indeed welcome. To ensure there is no repeat of the DDCA mess, this is one recommendation that must get implemented. To reduce the number of vice presidents from five to one, and to reduce the size of the working committee to nine also makes for better and more effective governance.

Where the Lodha commission might have gone a little beyond its remit is with reference to two sets of recommendations. First, it has recommended the one state-one vote principle. On paper, this is perfectly understandable. However, the structure of Indian cricket is such that it is impossible to implement this position without destroying the very foundation of the game in India.

According to this recommendation, the three existing associations in Maharashtra — Mumbai, Cricket Club of India (CCI) and Maharashtra — will get merged into one and that one association will have one vote. But what happens to the Ranji Trophy teams from Mumbai and Maharashtra? Mumbai versus Maharashtra, like Saurashtra versus Gujarat, are key Ranji Trophy games. By suggesting a merger, the very structure of India’s premier domestic tournament gets compromised.

If the associations merge into one, only that association will be eligible to host an international game based on the BCCI’s rotation policy. In such a situation the existing infrastructure, which includes stadia and academies valued at thousands of crores, will soon turn into white elephants. Mumbai, Pune and CCI all have world-class stadia and cricket academies.

Also, the ‘one state-one vote’ principle if implemented will mean the North-East, which has little or no cricket but which comprises many small states, will suddenly turn into the controlling faction in Indian cricket. If every state is a full member and has one vote, the North-East will end up having six votes while Western India, the hotbed of cricket, will end up with two votes: Maharashtra and Gujarat.

Second, in our parliamentary democracy if someone can be, say, BJP president and home minister at the same time, what stops Anurag Thakur from being Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association (HPCA) president as well as BCCI secretary? In fact, he is BCCI secretary by virtue of the fact that he is a representative of the HPCA. The very same principle applies to someone like Amitabh Chowdhury who is BCCI joint secretary only because he is president of the Jharkhand Cricket Association.

The BCCI recommends that it upload details of all its meetings on its website. Surely, it can’t include selection committee meetings? And by bringing the BCCI under the ambit of the RTI can’t mean people randomly asking questions related to team selection? As for the recommendation that betting in cricket be legalised, this is welcome. Most countries allow it so why should India be any different? But what has legalising betting to do with the task of weeding out cricket match- or spotfixing?

More importantly, the BCCI doesn’t have the remit to legalise cricket betting, the government of India does. So the Lodha committee seems to have overreached its brief in this department.

But all said and done, India’s cricket administration, in the aftermath of the Lodha report, has changed. Even if some of the recommendations are implemented, the very look of the BCCI will change. And it will be for the better.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bar BCCI selection meeting, people have right to know about everything else. What is it that should not not come under public domain? 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...