BCCI and IOA must sit across the table and sort out the issue of sending the team for the Asiad

BCCI, IOA should sort out Asian games issue: Ayaz Memon

Listen to this article

BCCI, IOA should sort out Asian games issue: Ayaz Memon

00:00

A barometer reading of public sentiment over the Indian cricket administration's refusal to send a team to the Asian Games later this year would indicate that resentment is boiling over. But to believe that money is the reason for Team India's non-participation at Guangzhou, as the mandarins of the IOA allege, is to miss the woods for the trees.

Of course pecuniary interests sit high on the priority list of the BCCI. But in this case the issue is a tad more complicated than Messrs Kalmadi, Randhir Singh and Bhanot would have us believe. For instance, the Board has disallowed even the women's team ufffd which has hardly benefitted from the moolah that is thrown at cricket in the country ufffd from going to China.

The BCCI's apparent disdain is actually a cover-up for the quandary in which it finds itself. The IOA and its cohorts have merged populism with peevishness to take pot shots at the cricket administration. This has created an unholy rigmarole driven by petty argumentation rather than addressing the issue on hand.

The crux, as I see it, is non-compliance with WADA regulations governing all athletes who take part in the Asian Games. The BCCI, though a signatory to the ICC's Anti-Doping Code, has been locked in a wrangle with WADA over the 'whereabouts' clause for almost two years. There is talk of the issue being resolved within the next year but if the BCCI agrees to send a team to Guangzhou, it automatically abdicates its stated position on the matter.

The 'whereabouts' clause says that players registered with WADA by the national association (in the case of cricket, the Integrated Registered Testing Pool comprising 11 players) will inform the anti-doping body of where they will be for 365 days so that they can be randomly tested any time. The BCCI has argued that cricket need not be covered by this since it is 'different'.

It is not anybody's case that this clause is hassle-free. In a way, it is invasive which is why it evoked howls of protests from sportspersons like Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray, to name just two ufffd and international federations that run football, basketball, baseball etc,. But the BCCI's argument of cricket being 'different', is specious if not downright silly.

The issue of drugs in sport needs to be seen holistically to understand why the whereabouts clause, while contentious, is important. Unofficial estimates reckon 80 percent athletes take performance enhancing drugs. Cheating aside, drugs also pose a serious threat to health and even life. For instance, Florence Griffith-Joyner, multiple Olympic gold medalist died prematurely after an alleged history of drug use. To curb this menace, some hardships to athletes are inevitable but not enough to obscure the need to put this regulation in place.

Roger Federer and Usain Bolt, to name just two acclaimed sportspersons, accepted the 'whereabouts' clause without compunction. Barring a few, no Indian cricketer is worthy of tying the shoelaces of these champions, so to argue that they should be exempt from such regulation smacks of petulance.

The more plausible reason for the BCCI's reluctance to sign the 'whereabouts' clause was the reported security threat to a couple of key players in the aftermath of 26/11. But those were extraordinary circumstances and the BCCI needs to make fresh inquiry with the home ministry and see if the threat persists. If not, the confrontation with WADA needs to be toned down and an amicable working arrangement found forthwith; if it still does, keep those players out of the Integrated Registered Testing Pool.

Point is the BCCI needs to get ahead rather than stonewall. It cannot now claim ignorance about either the timing of events such as the Asiad or the protocol necessary for participation. And by declining to play in Guangzhou, the BCCI not just shows insensitivity to public expectation but also undermines its responsibility being the world's richest, most powerful board to make cricket into a global sport.

WADA window
I don't know if there is still time for India to play at the Asiad. A concerted and creative attempt by the BCCI and IOA to resolve the issue rather than score brownie points could help. Hectic lobbying will have to be done with WADA to provide a window for this event without the BCCI becoming absolute signatories to the 'whereabouts' clause just yet.

Officials from the cricket establishment and the IOA need to sit across the table and hammer out a solution rather than throw up new ones. For instance, it cannot be that the IOA should insist on which players should participate in the Asiad. That is the sole prerogative of the BCCI, and it should be trusted to do a
competent job.

The bigger role, however, has to be played by the cricketers. I would like to believe that most players would be eager to represent the country in the Asian Games. Anil Kumble has already expressed his disappointment at the turn of events. If say Sachin Tendulkar and Mahendra Singh Dhoni went public with this desire, all opposition and objection would crumble.