During its ongoing tussle taking into account the Lodha Committee, the BCCI’s direction has been that it cannot go accompanied by all the recommendations superintendent by the Supreme Court order concerning July 18 because its make a clean breast relationships were the length of some of them. The board said that it could not force the recommendations regarding its 30 members and a majority vote was required.
In an the theater order regarding October 21, the Supreme Court had adaptableness the BCCI until December 5 to “safe malleability” from its aficionada relationships, but that deadline appears unlikely to be met.
Other amendments to the recommendations sought by BCCI
Members voted in favour of retaining five-enthusiast selection panels for men’s, women’s and junior cricket teams
Accepted the players’ association but on the order of an honorary basis. The committee had recommended the board should pay the members of the players’ connection.
Voted that junior teams should be kept at Under-23 level and not Under-22 as recommended by the Lodha Committee.
Rejected the opinion that IPL should be grow pass bound to seven weeks.
One individual should fulfill roles of Ethics Officer and Ombudsman. Also eligibility criteria for Ethics Officer should insert former officers of the Indian Administrative Service and the Indian Police Service. The committee had recommended on your own a former High Court deem as eligible for the role.
On November 5, the BCCI president Anurag Thakur submitted a version to the Lodha Committee maxim that its members had voted not to attend to the recommendations in totality at a special general meeting harshly speaking October 1. Thakur in addition to submitted the minutes of that meeting to the committee. The later are some of the main recommendations that the BCCI’s 30 members voted against.
The Lodha Committee had recommended that a nine-enthusiast Apex Council be the main decision-making body of the BCCI, replacing the existing in force committee. At the SGM, two prominent members – Tamil Nadu Cricket Association and Mumbai Cricket Association – raised objections.
TNCA secretary Kasi Viswanathan argued that even though the BCCI could by yourself choose one supplementary person for a chair in parable to the Apex Council, the proposed players’ attachment would have two nominees. “The House discussed that as per the ICC model, the representatives from players association are unaided consulted for cricketing matters and are not upon the apex body,” the draft minutes of the meeting said.
MCA president Sharad Pawar said the existing working committee “functioned efficiently”. After a vote, it was decided that the active committee would be portion of the Apex Council, along once the board president, secretary, joint secretary, treasurer and vice-president.
The Lodha Committee had with said a nominee of the Comptroller & Auditor General’s office would sit upon the Apex Council. The BCCI’s members voted adjoining it. They were for including the CAG manager in the finance committee, which was not recommended by the Lodha panel. The board moreover said the endorsed could sit upon the IPL governing council.
Election and term of office bearer
The Lodha Committee had said that no office bearer or qualified could assist on peak of three consecutive years upon the Apex Council as dexterously as at disclose level. A maximum tenure of nine years would be allowed for office bearers and officials upon the Apex Council and they would not be allowed to assist consecutive terms. This is a counsel the board and states have consistently opposed and that stance did not modify.
At the SGM, the BCCI members along with voted adjacent-door to adopting the Lodha Committee’s recommendations that sought to impose an age hat of 70 upon office bearers; bar ministers, giving out servants, and optional relationship or carrying out officials from supplementary sporting bodies, from becoming BCCI office bearers; prevent office bearers who have already completed nine years in the BCCI from contesting anew.
The minutes avowed the opinion was discussed in detail but no reasons for the leaving were listed. It on your own said the members felt that these recommendations would “in no mannerism pro to enlarged the game of cricket”.
Duties of the CEO
The Lodha Committee had recommended that the daily affairs of the board be managed by a CEO, who would be appointed by the Apex Council. However, taking into consideration the BCCI’s members were appraised of the CEO’s role as recommended, they voted closely it because he could become the “chairman” and supersede the BCCI secretary, the second most powerful person in the board at assistance.
“The members discuss the CEO, his con and the Secretary’s functions and come to an agreement that the Secretary’s functions as provided in the verify constitution of the Board should be continued. The CEO is all the rage, however his group to be modified accordingly. Also CEO should be made reportable to the Hon. Secretary,” the minutes said.
One make a clean breast one vote
The Lodha Committee had said that each divulge would be a full whisk and have a vote at BCCI elections, but no insist could have following again one vote.
It plus said that for states bearing in mind compound members – Maharashtra and Gujarat – the BCCI would “recognise” one of them to represent the disclose, even though others would become partner members.
At the SGM, Pawar said Maharashtra, Mumbai, Vidarbha, Cricket Club of India, Gujarat, Baroda and Saurashtra – the associations that would be affected – “have supported BCCI and game of cricket previously the to your liking old-fashioned days and their special status and rights should continue.”
BCCI treasurer Anirudh Chaudhry said giving full association to all states would depart “no incentive” for relationships to fabricate cricket in their territories.
Brijesh Patel, secretary of the Karnataka State Cricket Association, suggested that connection members should be firm “weighted” association. The members voted in favour of bearing in mind the ICC model once granting full attachment to buddies. “All existing members of the Board to continue in the middle of a vote and add-on members to be made Associate Members and unconditional a weighted vote, based upon the ICC model, where one nominee is elected from all member devotee to represent them upon the Board and guideline for leisure doings from Associate Member to Full Member.”