National Sports Governance Bill: Will govt clean up federations including BCCI — or isthere a danger of overreach?
So far, the BCCI has resisted all attempts to bring it under government regulation. Its main argument has been that since it does not seek funding from the sports ministry, it isn't answerable to it. Unlike other sports, the cricket board, an autonomous body, isn't covered under the Right to Information Act, 2005. However, with cricket returning to the Olympics in 2028, it could be forced to align with other national federations and follow the standard good governance practices. The government aims to achieve this by bringing the BCCI under the National Sports Board (NSB), as the Bill envisages. The NSB will have sweeping powers to lay down rules and oversee the functioning of all federations — from unconventional games like atya patya to mainstream sports like cricket.
Indeed, sports governance issues go beyond cricket. The Bill seeks to bring in legislation to improve 'the governance of the sports bodies and achieve better results in sports and reduce the disputes and litigation, inter alia, involving sports federations'. It relies on two main pillars — the NSB will be a SEBI-like body that will govern all sports, and the creation of a National Sports Tribunal, which will take the burden away from the lower courts and high courts. With the NSB, there are fears of government overreach and the question of appointing the right people, free of conflicts of interest or bias, to head the organisation. At the same time, there are concerns that the formation of the Tribunal, which will have the powers of a civil court and decide on disputes ranging from selection to election, could disenfranchise athletes and administrators of their right to approach the courts. Whether or not the government, through this Bill, succeeds in cleaning up the messy Indian sports administration depends on whether or not it manages to enforce its provisions in letter and spirit.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
11 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Operation Sindoor debate: Home minister Amit Shah counters Opposition with data, digs into Congress past
New Delhi: Union home minister Amit Shah slammed the Opposition in Lok Sabha for demanding proof of Operation Sindoor and criticised former home minister P Chidambaram for questioning Pakistani links of terrorists involved in Pahalgam attack. In his 75-minute intervention in the discussion on Operation Sindoor, Shah blamed Nehru-Gandhi family for erroneous decisions in the past and linked them to the current problem of terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir. "If PoK exists today with a separate identity, it is because of Nehru's decision to stop the war in 1948. It was a unilateral ceasefire, which was opposed by Sardar Patel," he said. "In 1948, Indian armed forces were in decisive position to take back PoK but then PM Nehru declared unilateral ceasefire." Tearing into opposition, Shah said, "I was pained yesterday when former Home Minister P Chidambaram raised the question that what was the proof that the Pahalgam terrorists came from Pakistan? What is Chidambaram trying to say? Whom does he want to save? What will you gain by saving Pakistan?" The Home Minister also slammed the then Manmohan Singh government for its response on terror attacks. "Following Operation Sindoor, our DGMO informed the Pak DGMO that India has attacked terror infrastructure on their land as per our right of self-defence. It cannot be like how it happened during Manmohan Singh's government, that terrorists come and kill us and we sit quietly...," Shah said. Following the Opposition's question over efficacy of the Modi government's decision to revoke Article 370, Shah said: "The number of terror attacks have gone down from 7,214 during UPA's regime 2004-14 to 2,150 in our 10 years from 2015-25," said Shah adding, "21 organisations with terror links that had been banned by the current government. "If you have ostrich-like mentality, you will not even be able to see the sun." aid Shah.
Indian Express
12 minutes ago
- Indian Express
England vs India: Lack of trust in No 3 and wicket-keepers behind leaving out Kuldeep Yadav from playing XI
Will Kuldeep Yadav get his first game of the series in the final Test of this long tour? The team management is considering that option but it's not going to be an open-and-shut case. Unfortunately for Kuldeep, according to those in the know, it isn't his skill or talent that the decision-makers doubt. What keeps him out of the team is the unreliability of India's frontline batsmen – namely the No.3 and, surprisingly, also the wicket-keepers. At the start of the tour, it was Rishabh Pant and now it's his replacement Dhruv Jurel. And also the local conditions. More about how The Oval might not be ideal for Kuldeep later. First the wicket-keepers. Pant has been an enigma for the cricketing world, and also for the team. When dealing with him, the Indian decision-makers stick to 'believe in God but lock your car' philosophy. He has been an asset to the team but not quite a steady stock – before this Anderson-Tendulkar Trophy series. At one point, there was a school of thought that plans can't be formed around someone with the habit of leaping down the track in the first over he faces. And certainly not someone who has scored just one fifty in nine innings in Australia, India's last Test outing before the England tour. It's not that those with correct strokes and conventional outlook towards scoring runs don't have bad patches. They also fail but it's human to trust a textbook cricketer playing in a time-tested manner. If a mathematician has to describe the Indian batting line-up, KL Rahul and Shubman Gill will be constants and batsmen like Pant the variables. On this tour, Pant was becoming one of the constants. In his seven innings here, he has two 100s and three 50s. But just when the team management was getting used to the runs coming from down the order, India's most comfortable-looking batsman on the tour was hit on the foot by a full ball – the fracture ruling him out of the remainder of the series. In Pant's place comes Jurel, who has played just one Test outside India. His outing at Perth wasn't too long. The other Virat Kohli-sized hole in the middle order is at the No.3 spot where Sai Sudharsan and Karun Nair haven't yet given confidence to the team management. They have been given chances but have shown a tendency to get out to innocuous balls and not score in crunch situations. They don't seem to be putting a high price on their wicket. In case India had a settled No.3 and a wicket-keeper playing percentage cricket, Kuldeep would have been a sure-shot selection in most Tests in England. That hasn't happened so India faces the old question again: Should they go with the specialist left-arm wrist-spinner or stick to pace all-rounder Shardul Thakur? Batting coach Sitanshu Kotak, like many other Team India coaches who have faced the media, explained the complexity of the Kuldeep call. He was asked a pertinent question about playing four specialist bowlers from 8 to 11 – in other words Kuldeep and three pure pacers. Kotak took his time to say that 'scoring 550 to 600 runs is as important as taking 20 wickets' and it was by scoring runs that they won their only Test of this series at Edgbaston. 'Once you play with five bowlers, everyone has to bowl well. In case you play with six bowlers, one of them can be under-bowled. And if that bowler is an all-rounder, you know he will also contribute in batting. But if he happens to be a pure bowler … when you look back at the game, you will think that instead of an extra bowler, if we had a batsman…' he explained the quandary. Kotak indicated that it's always easy to be wise after a game. Before it, the only thing the team management can do is think of playing a balanced side. But he still didn't rule out Kuldeep. 'That also depends on the wicket and what we feel about it .. the captain and coach will take a look at the pitch and decide who they will play.' Now to the pitch and the question of adding Kuldeep to the spin department that has un-droppable all-rounders Ravindra Jadeja and Washington Sundar. Can India play three spinners at The Oval? Historically, the venue helps spinners but this time around, the domestic games here have seen teams scoring in the range of 250-300 with pacers doing most of the damage. This is clear from the new addition to the England squad – homeboy Jamie Overton. With offie Shoaib Basher injured and Liam Dawson not really effective at Manchester, England will focus on their quicks. Overton joins Gus Atkinson, another Surrey boy, who know his way around The Oval. Does that mean India will play Jasprit Bumrah? That looks unlikely but can't be ruled out. If the World No.1 bowler sits out, India in all likelihood will play Mohammed Siraj, Akash Deep and, finally, Arshdeep Singh. Is it worth burdening Bumrah with extra workload? It was something that coach Gautam Gambhir, at one point on this tour, was dead against. But then India's only win on this tour came when Bumrah wasn't in the XI. And has he become less impactful with the new ball and gotten slower as the series has progressed? At The Oval, India need to bring out stone, paper and those sharp scissors.
Indian Express
12 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Donald Trump warns India of 25% tariffs if trade deal not reached
US President Donald Trump on Tuesday said that Indian imports could face tariffs as high as 25% if the two countries are unable to finalise a trade agreement soon. 'They are going to pay 25%,' Trump told reporters, according to CNN. When asked whether India would be charged tariffs between 20% and 25%, Trump replied, 'Yeah, I think so. India has been; they're my friends.' The United States and India have been discussing a trade deal for months, but no final agreement has been reached. Trump has been pressing for greater access for American goods to the Indian market. He has often made similar demands in other trade negotiations. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said further talks would be needed to move things forward. 'They have expressed strong interest in opening portions of their market,' Greer said in an interview with CNBC on Monday, as reported by CNN. 'We, of course, are willing to continue talking to them. But I think we need some more negotiations on that with our Indian friends to see how ambitious they want to be.' This is a developing story
