Indian Premier League

Price tag put BCCI off ICC's anti-corruption cover

Ajay S Shankar

April 30, 2009

Comments: 17 | Text size: A | A
Shashank Manohar will be the new BCCI president, Mumbai, September 27, 2008
Shashank Manohar, the BCCI president, is a senior member of the ICC board, which has consistently maintained that corruption in cricket is a menace © AFP
Enlarge

The Indian board's commitment to fight corruption in cricket has come under the scanner after it has emerged that it stayed silent for months on an ICC offer to provide full anti-corruption cover for the IPL this year, mainly because of the fee involved. The issue was raised at the BCCI's working committee on Wednesday, when members were informed that the fee quoted then by the ICC - US$1.2 million - was too high.

The BCCI, which runs the IPL, finally agreed to the offer this month when reminded about it during the ICC's executive board meeting in Dubai. That was on April 17, the day before the IPL began, and it was too late for the ICC's Anti Corruption and Security Unit (ACSU) - which starts work on an event at least two months in advance - to provide a credible level of preventive cover.

The BCCI's position has raised a few eyebrows within the Indian board and officials who attended Wednesday's high-level meeting told Cricinfo of their concern at a price being put to the fight against corruption - which, they feel, is an ever-present danger in cricket. To place the ACSU's fee in perspective, the BCCI had declared an overall income of approximately US$ 200m for 2007-08, and a profit of US$ 10m from the first IPL alone.

Shashank Manohar, the BCCI president, is a senior member of the ICC board, which has consistently maintained that corruption in cricket is a menace that demands the most stringent preventive measures possible. In fact, after the last ICC board meeting, Haroon Lorgat, the ICC chief executive, admitted there is a higher concern about Twenty20 cricket with all the excitement and money.

"The board has consistently said it cannot afford to be complacent (about the risk of corruption in Twenty20 cricket)," Lorgat told Cricinfo last week. "We are mindful that with Twenty20 cricket there is great excitement and money. Put those ingredients into a pot and there is a higher concern."

Last July, after the first IPL, the ACSU chairman Sir Paul Condon told the ICC's annual conference in Dubai that Twenty20 tournaments like the IPL bring with it the "biggest threat in terms of corruption in the game since the days of cricket in Sharjah."

"But the BCCI's position when it comes to the IPL is quite puzzling," a state association official, who attended BCCI working committee meeting, told Cricinfo. It's learnt that some officials pointed to the presence of individuals other than the players and support staff in the team dugouts last year and stressed the importance of utilising the ICC's services to lend credibility to the tournament's anti-corruption measures.

N Srinivasan, the BCCI secretary, and Lalit Modi, the IPL chairman, were not available for comment.

Officially, the BCCI is well within its rights to organise its own anti-corruption measures for the IPL, which is deemed a domestic event. "But it's obvious, isn't it, that the IPL is much more than just another domestic event?" another state association official, who attended the BCCI meeting, said. "There are nearly 80 foreign players involved from across the world along with Bollywood stars, their staff and supporters. No one is saying that there is corruption in the IPL; we are confident that there isn't. But are they doing enough to keep it that way?"

The IPL's anti-corruption protocol last year was handled by a team of around 10 officials, including retired police and military officials, recruited independently by the league. The team was guided by ACSU officials, who played a supporting role. This time, the IPL's team is being assisted by Nicholls & Steyn, the private security agency based in South Africa that has also been entrusted with the task of managing the event's security. Bob Nicholls, one of the partners of the security firm, had told Cricinfo that they were "not involved so much" with the anti-corruption aspect. In contrast, the ICC's ACSU is not a profit-based body and any income over expenses is pumped back into the game.

The ICC had first offered full ACSU coverage for the second IPL edition a few months after the hugely successful inaugural event got over last May, based on independent observations and inputs collated during the tournament. The IPL agreed and were then sent a quote on the fee this would involve. The IPL, however, indicated that the fee was too high and said they would revert on the offer, which they didn't till the ICC board meeting 12 days ago.

The ACSU's pre-event spadework involves staging reconnaissances in the host cities and gathering intelligence from local sources to identify potential corruptors. Against this background, the effectiveness of the IPL's anti-corruption procedures this year is open to question after the tournament - involving 59 matches over 37 days, at eight venues - was shifted to South Africa just three weeks before its scheduled start in India.

The ICC's ACSU came into being after the match-fixing scandal of 2000 involving Hansie Cronje, which also led to bans on Mohammed Azharuddin, the former India captain, and Salim Malik, the Pakistan batsman.

Ajay Shankar is deputy editor of Cricinfo

RSS Feeds: Ajay S Shankar

© ESPN EMEA Ltd.

Comments: 17 
Posted by royalbob on (May 02 2009, 17:42 PM GMT)

I completely agree with Homer, as IPL is getting more and more successful in South Africa, now ECB and Crickinfo started a more malicious and vigorous campaign to malign IPL by throwing suspicious accusations and quoting some unnamed sources. I also demand if crickinfo have the guts, please publish some BCCI official interview or comment otherwise at least be professional enough to publish the comments who question your anti-BCCI and anti-IPL .What ever you may do IPL is success you have to live with otherwise crickinfo will remain as insignificant as ECB.

Posted by snbirdi on (May 01 2009, 13:19 PM GMT)

The comment Posted by Homer2007 on May 01 2009, 00:59 AM GMT is BRILLIANTLY put! More often than not, in articles like these, we see Cricinfo quoting "an un-named individual" who somehow seems to have insider information on all these top official meetings. I still think Jagmohan Dalmiya needs to come back. That man is a magician with money and has made BCCI what it is today.

Posted by Oldnick on (May 01 2009, 09:14 AM GMT)

So, Figjam and Fragile Freddie are worth $3 million between them(NOT), but $1.2million is too much to pay to keep the tournament clean. Hmmm what does that say???

Posted by aryaman1994 on (May 01 2009, 07:47 AM GMT)

How can the ICC expect to be involved in IPL if it does not make a window for it?

Posted by robheinen on (May 01 2009, 06:07 AM GMT)

@SomewhatTure. I believe the IPL is offspring from the BCCI, which in turn is bound by ICC regulations & receives funding from the ICC. In this perspecrtive it's not wholy true to say that the IPL is independent. I wish it were and maybe we should indeed aim to cut the IPL lose from all other cricket organisations, since it's aim is making money, where other cricket organisation aim to promote the sport.

Posted by Zaheerahmed on (May 01 2009, 06:01 AM GMT)

I am convinced that there is more to this story than just ACU services being expensive for the richest Cricket Board. Dont forget that the menace of match fixing started from India and Mumbai is still the hub of such criminal activities. The relationship of IPL with Bollywood are known to everyone and so are the strong links between Indian Underworld and Bollywood.

Posted by cbesud2009 on (May 01 2009, 05:48 AM GMT)

If I was the BCCI I would definitely make sure the strongest anti corruption measures are in place. The IPL has all kinds of people hanging around. In this kind of permissible atmosphere with young kids making a lot of money anything can happen. Given the heavy gambling that goes on in India and our previous track record in match-fixing, is it not very important to be careful. What if tomorrow 2-3 of our most promising young players fall victim to match fixing? I really feel something like this will happen. The BCCI will as usual stick its head in the sand. When it happens the gullible individuals and Indian cricket will suffer. And the BCCI will get away scot free............

Posted by SomeWhatTrue on (May 01 2009, 04:15 AM GMT)

Should IPL management really care of ICC and their team? IPL is independent and I do not see anyone should criticize it for anything. Talk with team owners, if they want those so-called anti-bla-bla things. Any management will have same words: "we can take care of ourselves, do not bother us"..

Posted by softwillow on (May 01 2009, 02:50 AM GMT)

I actually empathize with IPL here - $1.2 million out of an operating profit of $10 million does seem very steep for the ASCU. While monitoring corruption is important, the price tag proposed by ACSU is nothing sort of looting.

Posted by Towelie on (May 01 2009, 02:21 AM GMT)

Isnt it just part of the game?

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Ajay S ShankarClose
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days
  • Cricinfo Widgets
Sponsored Links

Watch Bollywood movies for free

Transfer Money. Apply Online Now!

Access your Indian Rupee earnings from anywhere in the world.

on registering and transfer of USD 250 and above.

Available now at Cricshop