Bengaluru: Two incidents related to Indian cricket recently set social media abuzz with opinions. One involved a decision by the Board of Control for Cricket in India that highlighted the preferential treatment given to venues represented by powerful officials within the board.
The other came from Karnataka legislators, who openly claimed that each MLA and MLC was entitled to at least five VIP IPL tickets. This demand drew sharp and widespread, justifiably so, criticism from the public.
The lawmakers' unreasonable demand underscored the difficult position of sports administrators, who often operate under pressure from the political class and government officials.
At the same time, the BCCI's decision to allot Test matches of the high-profile Border-Gavaskar Trophy series to Guwahati, Ranchi and Ahmedabad, while overlooking the legitimate claims of traditional Test centres, showed that the board's functioning is hardly above criticism. The only difference, perhaps, is that politicians tend to be less subtle.
Consider this. Ranchi hosted England in February 2024, while Guwahati made its Test debut last year by hosting defending World Test champions South Africa. Ahmedabad, in addition to hosting several marquee ICC matches including knockouts and finals, has staged four Test matches since February 2021.
These include two against England and one each against Australia and West Indies. In the same period, Bengaluru and Mumbai have hosted only two Tests each, none of them involving England or Australia. Mumbai last hosted Australia in 2001, while Bengaluru did so in 2017.
According to convention, the BCCI follows a rotation policy when allocating matches. Given the country's size and the widespread popularity of the game, this approach is meant to keep all state associations satisfied. However, the policy appears to be applied selectively. The BCCI secretary, Devajit Saikia, is from Guwahati, and it is hardly surprising that Ahmedabad, home to the Narendra Modi Stadium, continues to host a disproportionate number of high-profile matches.
Chennai, Kolkata, Mohali, Nagpur and Mumbai have all benefited from preferential treatment at different times when officials from these regions held key positions in the BCCI. However, it has rarely been this obvious. While administrators may feel some obligation towards their home associations, it should not descend into blatant favouritism.
This has again stirred the topic of fixed venues for Test matches -- especially for high-profile series involving England and Australia or even South Africa. Agreed, consumption of international cricket isn't the sole right of tier-1 cities. However, the audience in tier-2 cities has less appetite for red-ball cricket as opposed to its white-ball version. The crowd attendences for Test matches over the years prove this point.
Therefore, rotating marquee Tests between six-seven centres that have shown great appreciation for high-quality red-ball cricket would serve at least twin purposes. While the Indian team will greatly benefit from the prior knowledge of the conditions, Test cricket will receive the patronage not only it deserves but requires too at this moment.