It seems Prithvi Shaw’s failed dope test has come as a biggest setback for the BCCI in recent times. The “poor handling” of this case and the Committee of Administrators “overstepping their brief” while taking a policy decision are the reasons why the Indian cricket board has been forced to come under the ambit of National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA), a senior BCCI official told PTI on Friday (August 9).
By coming under the ambit of NADA following a meeting with sports ministry, the BCCI has effectively become a National Sports Federation (NSF) despite being a financially autonomous body.
“The CEO (Rahul Johri) or the COA has no authority to take any such policy decision which is the prerogative of the governing body of the BCCI. They may write any sort of letter as they are running the administration and may implement an irregular decision. But that does not make it regular decision with authority,” a furious senior board member told PTI on condition of anonymity.
He blamed the CEO of “taking the government for a ride”.
“Unfortunate that the CEO has taken the Indian government for a ride in order to hide his own failings,” the official added.
Furthermore, a former working committee member feels that the approach while handling Shaw’s case was like playing into the hands of sports ministry and NADA. Shaw was handed backdated eight-month suspension by the BCCI for doping violations on July 30. The 19-year-old had inadvertently consumed a banned substance terbutaline without availing Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) certificate.
“To keep NADA at bay, your own system needed to be robust. Instead what did we see? We saw that Shaw was allowed to play IPL even after a failed dope test. And once everything was on paper, he was using NCA facilities.
“You don’t call that competence. And now, WADA may just close in as they might want to reopen the case with NADA gaining control,” the senior state association official said.
Opining his views on the same matter, a former BCCI legal committee member said CoA should have not bowed to the sports ministry’s “strong-arm tactics”.
“This was not exactly the CoA’s domain. They were supposed to run the administration. A policy decision should have been taken once the general body took over after the elections.
“I find Mr (Vinod) Rai to be a sensible man but is he getting sound advice from people like GM (Cricket Operations) and the legal team? If an agreement is signed, it can’t be revoked even after normalcy returns in BCCI,” the member questioned.
The implication of this development is expected to be massive as BCCI will now face more pressure to come under RTI Act. No wonder, the members are worried about the “autonomy” of the cricket board.
“How long can we stall coming under the Right To Information Act after this decision? It may not happen in three months but it might happen one year down the line. Who will take responsibility for that?” the BCCI official asked.
(With PTI inputs)
