But to throw out a BCCI president is easier said than done. At least 3/4th or 24 of the 31-member body must be willing vote him out at a special general meeting (SGM) -- a tough task in an organisation that has traditionally functioned through patronage.
There are already reports of hectic lobbying on both sides. Srinivasan has claimed he has received messages from "several members" expressing their support for him. The group that wants him out is learnt to have enlisted the support of 15-20 members - way more than the 10 needed to requisition an SGM, but short of the 24 to get him out. The battle for Srinivasan's ouster, in other words, is expected to be bitter and messy.
What is intriguing is the complete silence of board members at a time when Indian cricket faces arguably its worst crisis yet. No one in BCCI, it seems, wants to publicly call for his resignation - which, in turn, may have given Srinivasan the confidence to believe he can ride it out.
After talking to a number of BCCI bigwigs, and piecing together the flurry of conversations and meetings among them, this is the story that is emerging. It began soon after Meiyappan was arrested by the Mumbai police crime branch around Friday midnight. Within minutes, top BCCI members - among them Sharad Pawar, Rajiv Shukla, Arun Jaitley, Ratnakar Shetty, Niranjan Shah and Shashank Manohar - were on the phone with each other. The unanimous opinion of the group was that Srinivasan had to go - to assuage the near-universal public sense of outrage and disgust. The other consensus was that Shashank Manohar was possibly the best person to take interim charge of the board and initiate the process of cleansing Indian cricket. Manohar was told this and he is learnt to have agreed to take up the interim arrangement, provided Srinivasan's resignation was arranged.
So what's the way forward? When the BCCI bosses met in Kolkata on Saturday evening at a dinner hosted by former BCCI boss Jagmohan Dalmia, this was the question on everyone's mind: How to remove a stubborn Srinivasan? If he refused to quit on his own, the only option would be force him out.
The dilemma of top board members is that there's no guarantee that seven (plus Srinivasan) or more members won't vote against the motion, thus defeating it. And then BCCI would be stuck with Srinivasan, at least till September when his two-year term ends. There's an apprehension that Srinivasan might be able to drum up at least seven votes from smaller states that don't really have a big stake in cricket - say, states like Tripura and Assam - but get Rs 18-20 crore per year from the board. The payout was raised by Srinivasan and some of these board members, therefore, owe him.
The dominant group is, therefore, hoping that once 20 signatures are obtained for the letter seeking an SGM, Srinivasan will see the writing on the wall and step down.
Not seeking Srinivasan's removal isn't an option for board heavyweights like Arun Jaitley. For, questions of double standards would be raised: How come when it came to Pawan Bansal or Ashwini Kumar, Jaitley demanded their resignation, but chose not to do so with Srinivasan?
In the coming days, therefore, there will be a lot of persuasion, cajoling and prayers to get Srinivasan to agree to step down. If these efforts don't succeed, there will be no option but to give him a shove by calling for an emergency meeting seeking his removal. If that effort fails for some reason, the board faces a serious loss of face both with the Indian public and internationally.
0 comments:
Post a Comment