Why Harsha Bhogle should not be defending the BCCI's alleged rigging

There are two ways to look at the BCCI’s alleged interference in the ICC’s cricket committee election. One is to see the board unfairly using its financial power to bully weaker boards. The other is to see it as business as usual – the powerful have always had a greater influence on events than the weak.

The second option is the way Harsha Bhogle, the cricket commentator and writer, appears to see things. Bhogle took to Twitter earlier today to defend the BCCI in the face of such criticism (admittedly mostly from writers in Western cricket-playing countries).

He sent out the following three tweets:

“organisations doing what is right for them as old as history itself;empires weren’t built on concern for what is right for the less powerful”

“there is no cultural stereotype for organisations doing what is right; the british empire did it, the u.s. does it, the oil cartel did….”

“it should surprise nobody that indian cricket will do what is right for it….the question is therefore: what should the others do?”

Bhogle is correct in saying that the BCCI will do what is right for Indian cricket e.g. players such as Sachin Tendulkar are not fans of the DRS. Therefore the board will oppose the technology. It will also do what it can to protect and promote the IPL. After all, the IPL has been the biggest money spinner in the board’s history and has spread far more wealth to many more Indian cricketers than ever before. A board must take care of its players.

There is also an element of resentment in some of the criticisms that have come the BCCI’s way in recent years. There was a time when the likes of England and Australia ran cricket unimpeded. Now the power center has shifted decisively and this has taken some getting used to.

But Bhogle goes too far with his comparison with the British Empire and the US’s use of force. There is plenty of resentment of the US’s approach in the Middle East, for example. And India’s freedom struggle was based on the foundation that colonisation was wrong in principle. To argue now that it is okay would be to question that very notion.

What Bhogle essentially seems to be advocating is a tit-for-tat attitude but such an approach is not necessarily in the best interest of the game. Cricket Australia and the BCCI are not locked in battle. The English Cricket Board is not seeking to conquer Sri Lanka. Yes, there will be politics. There are always politics. Interests and ambitions will naturally be different. But the line should be drawn at undue influence.

The election was supposed to be by secret ballot and without interference by the boards. By allegedly compromising both, the BCCI has effectively rigged the process. There is nothing wrong with campaigning for its candidate. There is everything wrong with fixing the process so he can’t lose.

That is something Bhogle too should oppose.