|
Might of BCCI Ruining Careers |
|
|
|
Pitched By Cricket360 Observer
|
|
Friday, 13 March 2009 |
How would it feel if you are not allowed to comment on a match, which you have played for your country, and then you are not allowed to comment about it? Well, it indeed is happening with Craig McMillan, the former New Zealand batsman who is not begin allowed to commentate in the ongoing series between India and New Zealand as he is associated with the rebel Indian League, the Indian Cricket League, which is not the official league promoted by BCCI. Moot point in this whole issue whether BCCI should be allowed to dictate terms to such an extent that a player who is associated with the ICL may not be allowed to do the commentary on the game.
Craig McMillan must be ruing the moment when he had made a decision to play for the ICL in India, if it was indeed a decision that was taken in haste then he is repenting about it, as they say take a decision in the haste and repent later. He is not being allowed to do the commentary in the on-going series between India and New Zealand. Sky television that is doing the telecast of the present series has been told in no uncertain terms that if "Mecca" does commentating, it would upset the broadcasting giant Sony Entertainment as it has not only paid $1 billion to be the host broadcaster of the Indian Premier League but also holds the rights of all cricket televised out of New Zealand. McMillan had been zeroed in by the Sky Television to stand as a substitute for Ravi Shastri who would be returning to India to celebrate his birthday, and to fill in his place. But now this arrangement seems to be gravitating towards a controversy. As a matter of fact it was pointed out by Ravi Shastri that there could be a problem if McMillan is allowed to commentate in the series. It indeed is an ironic situation that on the one hand, Shastri is one of the board members of IPL and is also commentating, but McMillan having the same association with the ICL is not allowed to do the job for his country. The moot point in whole controversy is whether a player of the country can be barred from doing the job of commentating if his personal associations are not amenable to a country visiting his country to play a match. It should not be like that but that is how slowly the world of cricket is shaping up. Commercial interests are now becoming the reference points, it seems.
Newer news items:
Older news items:
|
