Too early to take my name as next BCCI president, says Ganguly

Kolkata: Former India captain Sourav Ganguly on Tuesday calmed talk about him taking over as the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) President, saying “it’s too early” to draw any such conclusions.

“It’s better not to take my name. There is no reason to take my name. It’s too early,” Ganguly told reporters a day after the Supreme Court, in a historic verdict, sacked board President Anurag Thakur and Secretary Ajay Shirke for not implementing the July 18 recommendations of the Justice R.M. Lodha Committee.

The bench comprising Chief Justice T.S. Thakur, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud also said that all the office-bearers of the BCCI and its affiliate state units, who are in conflict with the recommendation of the Lodha Committee, would demit office.

Ganguly, who is currently the Cricket Association of Bengal (CAB) President said nobody has got any choice but to implement the Lodha Committee recommendations in toto.

“We have got no choice. Nobody has a choice but to implement them,” said Ganguly, who took over the top post of the CAB after predecessor Jagmohan Dalmiya’s demise in 2015.

“I still have two more years in the position. The recommendations have put a cap of three years for one post,” Ganguly said.

The CAB is expected to see an exodus of incumbent office-bearers who do not meet the Lodha panel recommendations.

Asked about the replacements and whether he has them in mind, Ganguly replied in the affirmative.

“I have called for a meeting of all office-bearers tomorrow at 5 p.m. We will find a way out. It’s not that there are no replacements. Again, we all have to implement it, there’s no way out.”

The bench also said those qualified under the new guidelines could stay on, provided they gave an undertaking to carry out reforms intended to make the BCCI more transparent.

The court said it would choose the administrators for the BCCI in two weeks from people with with “integrity and experience in managing a similar enterprise” suggested by senior advocates Anil Divan and amicus curiae Gopal Subramanium.