Battle of the brink

Prem Panicker

You see this all the time on the streets of cities -- two bullies standing a healthy 10, 12 yards apart, calling each other every name in the book, and every now and again rolling up the shirt sleeves another notch, shaking a fist and going, 'Come here, I'll show you!'

You watch, in amusement -- knowing fully well that if either of them wanted to, they could cross the intervening space and say it with fists, but that neither of them has what it takes to actually do that and are secretly hoping that matters won't get to that stage.

Like I said, a common enough sight on the streets -- but I honestly didn't expect to see it in the highest echelons of cricket administration. Surely, administrators are not supposed to behave like street bullies?

Yet, in l'affaire Virender Sehwag, that is precisely what they have been doing.

When Jagmohan Dalmiya took office as president of the BCCI in September, the cricket world wasn't quite sure what to expect. More so when Dalmiya's immediate pronouncements -- extended tenure for the captain, no contract system as promised earlier, coach and physio to be hauled up on the carpet, et al -- indicated a somewhat unsavoury agenda.

The Mike Denness controversy has, for him, come as manna from a very providential heaven -- and the wily administrator has been playing to the gallery for all he is worth.

In the space of under ten days, Dalmiya has thus become firmly entrenched in public perception as the hero who is in the vanguard of India's fight against an oppressive cricket establishment, the man who symbolises national pride.

Which is exactly what Dalmiya wants. Here on in, the media will think ten times before criticising any action that Dalmiya takes on any issue -- this after all is India, we can't stomach criticism of our heroes, can we?

His actions and statements, thus, are perfectly understandable. In fact, you tend to marvel at his cleverness in playing the cards handed out to him.

Consider his statements on the Sehwag issue: He has said, first, that as far as the BCCI is concerned, selection is the prerogative of the selectors, and the board is not involved.

You can't find fault with that statement -- that is precisely how it is. That the media, in its collective hysteria, choses to see that statement as a defiance of the ICC is another matter.

The selectors for their part -- and you can bet big money that they would have checked with Dalmiya before doing what they did -- duly picked Sehwag in the 14-member squad. Again, you can't fault that -- the guy scores a century on debut, you don't seriously suppose the selectors would dump him, do you?

Is this, then, defiance of the ICC? That is how it appears -- but in truth, it is no such thing. There is nothing in the ICC rule book that says a player banned for a game cannot be part of a squad -- the rule only says that such a player cannot play.

At this point, all the ICC needed to do was issue a public clarification that Sehwag's ban was in force for the first England-India Test at Mohali beginning December 3, and to simultaneously instruct the umpires for the game, and the duly appointed match referee, that Sehwag should not play.

A problem would have arisen only if Sehwag actually stepped onto the field of play. Until and unless Sehwag actually stepped onto the field at Mohali, there was no issue for the ICC to get hysterical about.

But instead, what does the ICC, this time in the person of its CEO Malcolm Speed, do? It goes haywire, and spews ultimatums like so much confetti.

Tell us by Friday, Speed says, whether you will play Sehwag or no!

Why, pray? Playing conditions stipulate that the composition of the final XI need be released only on the morning of the match -- so why does the ICC have to insist on a Friday deadline, one morever that goes against its own rules?

The sensible thing to do would have been to wait, to see if Sehwag actually took the field on Monday. If he did, the match referee would immediately declare the Test null and void, the English team would pull out, and that would have been that.

And if Sehwag did not figure in the playing XI -- and I'll bet very good money that neither the board, nor the selectors, nor the team management, have any intention of playing him in the first Test -- there would have been no issue whatsoever.

The ICC failed to recognise Dalmiya's brinkmanship for what it is and instead, fell headlong into the trap.

Now, the ICC has effectively given Dalmiya another stick to beat it with. If the board president does not comply with Speed's latest ultimatum, what exactly is the ICC going to do?

Ban India for not releasing its team list three days ahead of the Test -- when the rules clearly state that the playing eleven does not have to be named till half an hour before start of play?

That will really put the seal on an affair that has been handled with incredible stupidity right from day one.

And talking of stupidity reminds me of Mike Denness, and his latest statement. We are all, of course, grateful to the match referee for telling us that Sachin Tendulkar was only cleaning the ball, and not actually tampering with it.

We are grateful, too, to the match referee for clarifying that it was the media that tampered with his words, and that he had never said Tendulkar was guilty of ball-tampering. It comes from the fact that the media is illiterate -- you see, we saw the printed statement put out by Denness on November 19, with the words: 'Sachin Tendulkar, for tampering with the ball, fined 75 per cent of his match fees and given a suspended sentence of one Test', and we thought the words meant what they said. Sorreeeeee!

But one aspect does puzzle us -- on November 19, Mike Denness landed up for that press conference and sat there, silent. I am not allowed to talk, he indicated.

And he was quite right -- the ICC codes clearly state that match referees are not allowed to discuss their actions.

Begs the question: Why then, over the past few days, has he been putting out a statement a day on the incidents? Surely this is a clear violation of the ICC's own norms?

It will be interesting to see what the governing body does to its own official in this regard,. now.

The Mike Denness Controversy -- Complete Coverage