Sharad PawarThe
moment he checked in at Park Shereton, Chennai, 36 hours from the AGM,
Srinivasan camp knew they had a battle on their hands. And quite a
battle it turned out to be. From snatching away, the crucial secretary's
post away from Srinivasan to ensuring that the President's post also
went to a man who wasn't his Southern rivals preferred choice, the
'Pawar factor' did have its role to play.Former BCCI and ICC Chief Sharad Pawar, when asked how big a difference it would have made had he not turned up personally, "It would have been a clean sweep against us," he answered without batting an eyelid. This and more as Pawar sits down to talk about a BCCI election, where he was the non-playing captain in an effort to limit Srinivasan's clout over Indian cricket. Excerpts..
Your first reflections on these elections?
We have been successful in shifting the BCCI headquarters to Mumbai from Chennai. An impression was constantly created that they had an overwhelming majority. Even in Court it was presented through Srinivasan's counsel that that the Board was unanimously backing him. Today's election has set things straight. In today's election, all the posts were decided by a margin of one or two and the most number of votes they got was 16, including the vote of the chair.
The Baroda vote made a crucial difference. According to the Baroda Cricket Association constitution, the managing committee is to decide their representative for the AGM. But the candidate authorised by the managing committee wasn't allowed to attend the AGM. Instead, the chairman of the meeting allowed the BCA president to represent the association. Shashank Manohar pointed out to the chair that it wasn't according to the BCA constitution and sought a clarification from Shivlal Yadav. All he said was he had taken a decision and declined to explain the rationale behind the decision.
As a result, the Baroda vote ended up going to the opposition camp. Had that not happened, the result would have reversed and we would have been in majority.
Did you also leave the preparations too late?
Maybe. We decided everything after reaching here. We didn't really discuss anything in advance. Some of the others had claimed to have got all six signatures from the East zone three months ago, and also substantially lent financial support to some other members.
Was there never a BJP whip?? Or if there was one, did some from BJP back out?
We can't really say political parties had an influence on the election. There hasn't been a party-line in BCCI. There was no BJP whip. Had it been the case, Gangaraju, a BJP MP, wouldn't have been elected Vice President from their side.
How much of a difference did your presence play?
It would have been one sided against us if I was not there. In a way, it hasn't been a fair election. Something similar had happened when I lost the election in 2004. The member's vote, the chair's vote and the casting vote was exercised only by one man.
If you see the voting pattern, East were with them. In South, all the votes were not with them as they had claimed. In West, all were with us, except Baroda where they did hera-feri. North, Delhi and J & K were with them. Central with us, so of the five regions, three haven't voted in their favour?
Your rivals seems to be suggesting Dalmiya won on their backing..
Dalmiya was elected unanimously. We could always field a candidate from the East but we thought that since it was East's turn, we should let one of the East Zone candidates head the Board. Dalmiya, being the seniormost from the zone, was chosen unanimously. It is being projected that a particular group backed Dalmiya but that is not the case. He was elected as a consensus candidate from all groups.
But Dalmiya isn't young anymore..
Yes. His health is not the same. That's why the Secretary becomes important. Anurag is a young leader who wants to do good for Indian cricket.
Have you managed to put an end to the Srinivasan regime? What is your reading?
We were successful in having our candidate for the post of the secretary, the second-most important post. The other posts we would have been successful had it not been for influencing of the votes. You can make up your mind based on the election results.
It's the end of the one-man show that prevailed over the last few years. Now on, you will see a different picture emerge in the BCCI meetings. Dalmiya and Anurag would establish a new system. Gone are the days of running the Board with remote control.
Yet Srinivasan will continue to represent India at ICC?
Ideally we wanted someone like a Jagmohan Dalmiya who is the President to represent. But Srinivasan has been allowed to continue representing BCCI at the ICC because we are in a situation when an Indian is in charge of ICC. We don't want to disturb that situation which tarnishes the BCCI's image and that of Indian cricket. So it was decided unanimously that he should continue for now.
Isn't it true that you were also keen on contesting at one stage?
I was never interested in going into the BCCI again. The media was portraying it to be. Once I had held the ICC President's post, why would I want to come back in the BCCI.
For us, be it Shashank Manohar, Ajay Shirke or myself, we feel this game should be clear and free of personal interests. Srinivasan had to leave due to personal interests, especially with his family members' names featuring in the IPL fixing scandal.
No comments:
Post a Comment