Gavaskar and Kapil Dev express unhappiness over some Lodha Panel recommendations
FORMER INDIA SKIPPERS Kapil Dev and Sunil Gavaskar minced no words while speaking about the implementations directed by the Lodha Committee. The duo opined that some of the recommendations like – one vote for one state and cooling off period of three years for administrators, were too harsh.
As reported by PTI, in an interview with fellow commentator Sanjay Manjrekar, Sunil Gavaskar explained,
“I have the greatest of respect for three gentlemen who formed the panel and gave their recommendations...I feel the thing about one state one vote is a little bit hard on associations that are founding members of the Board. If you go to England, you will find that not every County plays the English County Championships. Not every state plays in Australia's first-class championship (Sheffield Shield). Therefore, to have every state play Ranji Trophy is going to dilute the level of cricket and not help us at the international level. What is being done at the moment where teams play junior level is if you do well you get promoted. Like Chhattisgarh did well at junior level, therefore they have been promoted and that is the way to go. You just can't have states giving direct entry into Ranji Trophy.”
While talking about the tenure and cooling off-period, the ‘little master’ said that just like cricket, the administrative set-up also requires a blend of youth and experience.
“We have seen, that over a period of time in Indian cricket there have been 3-4 senior players and 1-2 junior players inducted into the team. I think the recommendations from what I read in the papers, where you must also have situations where you want people who have been there for a long time. Kapil Dev has retired. I have retired from the game. That is something the administrators need to look at. If I am not having a designation and I am still going, it is not the way to do it.”
Meanwhile, Kapil Dev stated that some of the Lodha panel’s recommendations are too much to ask for. The 1983 WC-winning captain suggested that the two parties should sit down and discuss what if best for Indian cricket.
“Some things that I come to know, delight me. There is an age (limit) for everybody. There is one year left for me to be a selector, fine because it says 60 years. But I could not understand that Maharashtra can have only one vote. How can a place like Mumbai which has done so much for cricket can vote only after three years? The mind-set needs to open up. You can't say this is my thing; this is ours. We have to take the game much ahead of the time and then it will be better. If you are stiff with ideas, it won't help anybody. They should sit down and discuss what is best for cricket. Some of the recommendations, I feel is too much. Lets' not take anything away from the BCCI. They have looked after this game for 60-80 years. I think one has to be more calm and easy and see what is best for the game. I don't believe in hire and fire."
The 57-year-old insisted that the selectors need to have a minimum of a five-year term.
“Three years is too quick. Things are happening and before you know whether you should do it or not, the time is over. Running such a big organisation is not a small thing. May be 30 years back it was different. Back then we didn't have coaches and management. Now you have professional people to help. Today, the board has changed. From Doordarshan, today the board has its own production. We should feel proud about that. What does the constitution say of the Board? It says improve the game in India. We need to take that effort. We should not forget the people who have run this game for so many years. We should respect them, but at the same time, change is required and there is no harm.”
Get the latest in the world of Sports, Teams, and Players! Free Delivery to your Inbox.
