Drastic steps for drastic situations

In "The Wildest Tests", Ray Robinson's absorbing book about matches disrupted by riots and disturbances, Tests played in India figure very prominently. The book, released 30 years ago, lists four matches held in India ­ India vs West Indies at Calcutta in 1966-67, India vs Australia at Bombay in 1969-70, India vs New Zealand at Hyderabad in 1969-70 and India vs Australia at Calcutta in 1969-70. If a second edition of the book were to be brought out - by someone else, since Robinson passed away in 1982 - there is no doubt that India would occupy a pre-eminent place in the listings.

To be sure, there have been serious riots that disrupted matches in other countries too, and Robinson himself has described in vivid detail events that led to Tests in Australia, Pakistan and the West Indies being affected by happenings on and off the field. But India will continue to figure prominently thanks to various factors that include overcrowded stands, emotional attachment with the home team, an inability to accept defeat, lax security, and petty-minded administrators whose chief interest is the vote of the association to which a one-day international has been allotted.

Unfortunately, this is how the system works in India, and that is why many centres that do not boast of any hoary cricketing tradition and that lack the machinery to conduct international matches are given games. That only puts players and spectators in discomfort, endangers the limbs and careers of cricketers and, as events on Tuesday proved, halts the entertainment for genuine cricket-lovers at the ground and millions of TV viewers round the world.

Think of crowd disturbances and, whether one likes it not, Kolkata has to figure very strongly in mind. The serious, almost frightening riots that disrupted the World Cup semifinal at the Eden Gardens in March 1996 or the India-Pakistan Asian Test Championship encounter three years later are not events that one can erase from the mind easily. In the latter match, there were two riots and, as every cricket-follower knows, the denouement was unique ­ the last rites were performed before an empty Eden Gardens, an eerie experience. On both occasions, India were hurtling to defeat when unruly elements took a hand, throwing missiles onto the ground and setting the stands on fire.

Generally it is when the home side is losing or when there is dissatisfaction with a crucial umpiring decision that such unfortunate incidents occur. The same analysis can be proffered for the crowd's disgraceful behaviour at Jamshedpur and Nagpur, but there can be no rational explanation for the behaviour of the unruly elements at Rajkot.

India were heading for victory, Sourav Ganguly and Virender Sehwag ­ not to mention some of the West Indian batsmen in the morning ­ had provided entertainment fit for a king, and everything seemed hunkydory. Where then was the need for a section of the crowd to throw bottles and assorted missiles and run the risk of ending the entertainment prematurely, halting play and having the match abandoned?

Few can blame the West Indies team for leaving the field and refusing to continue or Mike Proctor for abandoning the match. Three times in three matches was pushing it a bit too far; there is only so much the match referee can take, and if he decides to send in a rather unflattering report to the ICC, few can find fault with him.

What then is the solution? It would be easy to say that venues with a history of crowd trouble should be banned from conducting international matches. But then Kolkata would probably figure uppermost in the minds of most people advocating such a radical step. Interestingly Ahmedabad, a Test centre and the venue of the fourth one-day international of the current series, has not exactly covered itself with glory in this disturbing aspect.

It is a city with a history of communal trouble, and one remembers the Pakistan outfielders being pelted with stones on the fourth day of the Test match in March 1987. Imran Khan rightly led his team off the field, and following appeals for calm over the public address system by Sunil Gavaskar and Kapil Dev, play resumed after a break of almost an hour. The visitors injected a dose of ironic humour with six of the players taking the field wearing helmets.

It is thus with a feeling of trepidation, rather than anticipation, that we look forward to Friday's game. But there is little doubt that the administrators must take steps to control the growing menace. The ICC for its part has confirmed that it was seeking urgent confirmation from the BCCI concerning the adequacy of safety and security measures in place for the remaining matches of the current series.

ICC Chief Executive Officer Malcolm Speed has said that following three consecutive games marred by crowd unrest and disturbance, the body was seeking reassurances about the safety of players and officials. This is a step in the right direction, but more obviously needs to be done.

The ICC has been in constant touch with the BCCI after the unsavoury incidents at Jamshedpur and Nagpur and is in the process of seeking a full explanation of the Rajkot fiasco. In addition, the ICC has asked for details of the ground stewarding and security plans for the next four matches. It has also asked BCCI officials to meet with Procter and brief him fully of the contingency measures.

While the more radical step of boycotting the international status of a venue has been advocated by a few, the ICC till date has never thought along those lines. But Speed has now confirmed that this is an option that will be considered at a meeting of ICC's Safety and Security Committee. "We have asked this committee to consider appropriate penalties for venues that consistently fail to meet their obligations in meeting minimum standards of security. This is likely to include the ultimate sanction of withdrawing international status from a ground, combined with a heavy financial penalty," Speed is quoted to have said.

Ideally, all member boards affiliated to the ICC should subscribe to the principal that the safety and security of players and officials is paramount and that it is their responsibility to ensure that appropriate measures are in place for all international matches. As already explained, this is easier said than done where the BCCI is concerned.

But now with three successive matches being affected and with the ICC taking a firm stand on the issue, the Indian Board may have no option but to fall in line. Sunil Gavaskar for one has made it quite clear that the BCCI must seriously start thinking of banning venues where there is crowd disturbance. Spectators who cannot accept an Indian defeat should get no cricket whatsoever, Gavaskar, who heads the ICC's cricket committee, has said. He has also called for the BCCI to consider fining the staging associations for not ensuring proper conduct of the match.

For his part, BCCI chief Jagmohan Dalmiya, while outlining plans to install closed-circuit TV cameras in the stands to monitor the crowd, has also hinted that disturbance-prone venues could struggle to retain international status. To some, this would be a rather extreme step, then again, but three disturbances in three games calls for some drastic action.