Bhubaneswar: The Supreme Court’s ruling on curtailing financial powers of BCCI coming on Saturday in the wake of the recent standoff of RM Lodha panel with the cricket board, has dealt a deadly blow to aspirations of rising cricketing powers like Odisha.
Under such circumstances, Odisha Cricket Association (OCA) has shown its apprehensions over the issue and this standoff has raised doubts as Odisha cricketing board claimed that the standard of the sports would be badly affected by such a move.
Speaking on the issue OCA Secretary Ashirbad Behera lamented on the issue saying that “if restrictions on monetary transactions are put in place as per Supreme Court’s ruling and state associations are denied of any financial assistance then sports especially cricket will be badly affected in state.”
The apex court on Friday said the BCCI has to comply with its July 18 judgment which passed Lodha Commission’s suggested reforms. Besides, states should also submit an affidavit showing implementation of the recommendations. Until that BCCI will not be allowed to give money to state associations.
Similalrly, the panel has also said it would fix a financial limit on the monetary value of contracts by BCCI and any transactions above that should be presented to the jurisdiction to the discretion of the panel.
Meanwhile, board president Anurag Thakur eased off tensions and played safe hands saying they would abide by the court’s ruling but only after going through its interim judgment.
Earlier, BCCI had cited practical difficulties in implementing all recommendations suggested by Lodha seeking its overall look into all aspect of the game before following the suggestions.
Following allegations of humongous scandals, match fixing and corruption charges the Supreme Court had appointed a three member panel led by justice RM Lodha to inspect the detail functioning of BCCI, its administrative, financial and other aspects and suggest reforms.
Some reforms like one state vote, restriction on minister and bureaucrats from board membership, and those above 70 years of age among others were contentious issues that have been the reasons of standoff between the Board and the Supreme Court.