7/27/2019 Epw Big Brother BCCIs Watching

1/2

september 21, 2013 vol xlviII no 38 EPW Economic & Political Weekly74

POSTSCRIPT

Big Brother BCCIs Watching!

By tightening its iron-fisted grip over the media, the Board of Control for Cricket in India has morphed into

the thought police of a Big Brother.

by Sharda Ugra

In May and June this year, when the Indian Premier

League (IPL) was, much to its self-regarding outrage, being

hauled away for questioning, N Srinivasan, president of

the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), found him-

self trailed by reporters, cameras and mikes. Distinctly dis-

pleased, as he headed for his car on one occasion, Srinivasan

(Srini, to friends) barked out: Why are you hounding me?

The simple answer? His son-in-law, Gurunath Meiyappan,

high official/team principal of the Chennai Super Kings,

Srinivasans beloved IPL team, had been arrested by theMumbai police for placing bets during the IPL. On the day in

question, Srinivasan was three stories on two legs BCCI

chief, IPL team owner, father-in-law. The most powerful man

in cricket tripped up by a black sheep in the family who had

toppled his business. Whats not to hound? A simple answer

to that question: because Srini was in the dock, because the

media are hounds, because they we can.

It was a twisted, ironic turning of the tables on

the man under whose regime BCCI has become

not only enormously richer but also enormously

in control of the messages around Indian cricket.

During the IPL corruption scandal, those messages,

for perhaps the first time in his reign, had goneout of Srinivasans control. His otherwise glacial

disdain for a notoriously fickle 247 media was suddenly

put under unrelenting headlights and left unprotected by

either his position or influence.

BCCIs relationship with the independent, mainstream

media has gone from general chumminess to a teeth-gritting

tolerance on either side. During the last five years, the time

when Srinivasan rose from BCCI treasurer to secretary to

president, the Board has become more determined to tighten

an iron-fisted grip over the media, starting with the medium

that generates the bulk of its revenues and reaches an

audience of millions television.

In 2008, BCCI put Sunil Gavaskar and Ravi Shastri on its

payroll with gargantuan price tags. Sunny & Ravi Inc

became mandatory mascots, required to be on commentary

duty wherever India played, regardless of who owned the TV

rights. The two most influential Indian voices on cricket

television were safely co-opted. Their signing coincided

with the advent of the IPL and the rise ofBCCIs Midas-like

monetiser, Lalit Modi. The Gavaskar-Shastri duopoly was a

beginning. As revenues skyrocketed through the IPL, BCCI set

up its own independent TV production unit. This new team

(partly cannibalised from Neo Sports/Nimbus who owned

the TV rights to cricket in India until 2012) even purchased its

own outside broadcast vans. Ownership over Indian cricket

was to be established at every level.

Much of this could be put down to Lalit Modis desire to

commercialise every inch of the Indian cricket property.

But when the first round ofIPL sleaze excised Modi from the

system in 2010, his philosophy was kept alive. Indias wealth

had earned it the right to become crickets Big Brother. When,

during the 2011 tour of England, former England captain

Nasser Hussain criticised BCCIs obduracy over the DecisionReview System (DRS), Shastris rebuttal was slightly petulant:

England are jealous about the wayIPL is going, jealous that India is

No.1 in world cricket, jealous that India are world champions. They

are jealous because of too much money being made byBCCI.

The repercussions of that skirmish went deep when Eng-

land toured India a year later. Star Sports won media rights

for all cricket played in India but BCCI retained its

hold over production rights. Through production

came the full force of Big Brothers thought police.

Commentators on the home networks were told

that three topics were taboo, never to be brought

up on air: selection, administration and DRS.

Then followed a bitter battle over the cost ofproviding space and access to Sky TV and BBC

radio in the broadcast areas at grounds. Sky had paid Star for

the world feed, but a BCCI official huffily asked why the Sky

commentary team should be given access in Indian grounds

without a cost: So that Hussain and others can come here

and criticise India? The inability to accept criticism was

turned into a national project. Skys expert team worked out

of studios in west London.

BCCI then refused accreditation to photo agency Getty

Images for its use of Indian cricket pictures for commercial

gain rather than editorial purposes. A media coalition made

of wire services like Reuters, Associated Press (AP) and

Agence France-Presse (AFP) boycotted the matches in protest.

Most certainly, there are commercial constraints at work

in each of these incidents. In the past, overseas broadcasters

have talked through requirements and arrived at agreeable

fees or quid pro quo arrangements. Even in the case of the

England tour, solutions could have been worked out, but BCCI

chose to bring in the heavies. Sanjay Manjrekar, who did

studio work for the England series for Star had tweeted

Fans like Boycott. Only guy who is free from BCCI shackles

on our show, before pulling it off his Twitter account. The

kerfuffle with Getty continues; when Australia toured India

SPORTS

BCCI has become

not only

enormously richer

but also enormously

in control of the

messages aroundIndian cricket

7/27/2019 Epw Big Brother BCCIs Watching

2/2

Economic & Political Weekly EPW september 21, 2013 vol xlviII no 38 75

POSTSCRIPT

in early 2013, Ian Chappell refused to be a part of the

commentary team because ofBCCIs unwritten three-point

dont-do list. Commentary during the series sounded pro-

grammed and tinny: catches that went down after hitting

Virat Kohli on the chest and M S Dhoni on his wrist were

called half-chances.

In the IPL that followed, commentators Danny Morrison

and H D Ackerman, in their high-volume excitement, intro-

duced Virat Kohli, talking of him as a possible future captain of

India. That happened to be the last IPL game both worked

on. Big Brother was watching and listening.

Since the IPLs second round of sleaze hit the headlines

(but not on IPLTV, where the games greats made no refer-

ence to it), there came one final squeeze this time, on the

players. Quiet words have been had with Virat Kohli,

Cheteshwar Pujara and Rohit Sharma for giving interviews to

newspapers. Sharma called up one reporter, requesting him

to spike the interview. This, after the players had producedthe best news around Indian cricket in months by winning

the Champions Trophy.

On 19 July, 35 contracted players were sent an email

which read:

Dear All, Trust you are well. You are requested to refrain from giving

interviews to the media, without the prior, written permission of the

BCCI. Regards, Sanjay Patel, Hony. Secretary, BCCI.

Never let it be said the BCCIs Ministry of Truth doesnt fill

in its paperwork.

Sharda Ugra (Sharda.Ugra@espn.com), a senior editor at ESPNcricinfo.com, has been a

sports journalist for almost 24 years.

SPORTS | CINEMA