Why Anurag Thakur?
The plead on either India should resume shared cricket ties with Pakistan has collected steam again, and as a secretary of a Board of Control for Cricket in India and a BJP MP, Thakur is well-placed to demonstrate views of a cricket house as good as a government. He is also during a helm of a BCCI as it strives to exercise a array of reforms to revive a design after a IPL match-fixing and betting scandal, and to solve dispute of seductiveness issues of office-bearers, and re-evaluates a need to revoke a ‘Big Three’s’ financial poke in a game
Sandeep Dwivedi: What is a standing of a stirring India-Pakistan array slated to be hosted in Sri Lanka?
My predecessors had sealed an agreement with a Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) for a subsequent 8 years, (including) a array to be played. In 2015, India was ostensible to revisit a UAE or any other neutral venue as motionless by India and Pakistan. So Pakistan wanted to know when and where we should play. Mr Shashank Manohar (BCCI president) met a PCB authority in Dubai and both of them motionless to play in Sri Lanka. For permissions and domestic clearances, we have created to a Ministry of External Affairs to give us a sanction. It is their call, whenever they take it.
Sandeep Dwivedi: As a BJP MP, what’s your take? Should we play Pakistan?
In a final 5 years, a family with a neighbours weren’t that good. But a NDA supervision has put in efforts to have improved family with Nepal, Bangladesh and other countries, including Pakistan. we consider we have to take a call either there should be any talks, if we wish to rivet with them. If we engage, afterwards we can lift a emanate of terrorism, cricket and trade. But if we don’t engage, we give that event to someone else.
Shubhajit Roy: This is not a initial time a BCCI has due a cricket array with Pakistan. In a past too, a MEA has put a feet down and not privileged such proposals. Is there a miss of communication or coordination between a BCCI and a MEA?
Two things. As we said, there was a agreement where we had concluded to play with Pakistan. It was sealed on Apr 9, 2014. As per a contractual obligations with a PCB, they have taken a call and we have created to a government. Now it’s adult to a MEA to take a final call.
Shubhajit Roy: So do we clarity that a MEA is behaving formidable on this?
When it comes to Pakistan, it’s not that easy to take calls. Five years ago, amicable media didn’t play a role. Today we see a lot of reactions on amicable media, yet we still can’t contend it’s a clarity of a whole country. You can’t go usually by amicable media, we have to demeanour during a interests of a nation. we consider tactful family are also unequivocally critical — either we wish to sojourn during loggerhead or we wish to lay opposite a list and plead things. We have been deliberating cricket, trade, terrorism, PoK and Kashmir with Pakistan.
Vandita Mishra: From what you’ve said, one gets a clarity that your personal perspective is that India should play Pakistan. Is that right?
As we pronounced earlier, we play Pakistan in World Cup events. We played them in a 2015 World Cup, we’ll play them subsequent year in a Asia Cup. We’ll play them in Mar in a T20 World Cup. So when we play them in multi-national tournaments, what stops we from personification them in a shared series? That’s a doubt we have to answer.
Vandita Mishra: How do we demeanour during a outcome of a Bihar elections and how does it impact we as a member of a BJP?
I visited Bihar before a elections and saw hundreds of youths watchful to accommodate us during 12.30 am. Those people stood in a center of a road, in a dark, with no light for a widen of during slightest 5 km around them. We saw this not in one place, yet in district after district. Where did we go wrong in a choosing discuss notwithstanding a girl being in a favour? we consider we need to investigate that. What happened in those dual months? That’s what has to be seen. The celebration has sent a integrate of comparison ministers and office-bearers to pronounce to a internal office-bearers as good as former ministers in a state to know where we went wrong.
Maneesh Chhibber: Do we consider too many of your colleagues are vocalization too most outward Parliament, and that might be inspiring your government’s opening inside a House?
We have been open (to discussions) from a initial day. we still remember in a Lok Sabha, a Congress said, ‘We wish a plead on cost rise’, and Venkaiah Naidu usually stood adult and said, ‘Let’s have a debate’. Then they were repelled and pronounced ‘Aaj nahin, kabhi aur (not today, some other day)’. So initial we wish to have a plead and afterwards we bashful away. They’ve been lifting a emanate of dogmatism in a media, inside Parliament, outward Parliament. We said, ‘Let’s have a debate’. They couldn’t listen to a Home Minister for 30 minutes. Isn’t that intolerance? If we wish to debate, we have to listen to a other side as well. we ask we either it was toleration (on display) during a 1984 riots, Mumbai riots, Bhagalpur riots. The Dadri occurrence took place in a state of Uttar Pradesh, yet a Chief Minister did not come to Noida, usually sent a helicopter. Nobody reported that.
Maneesh Chhibber: That is precisely my question. The fact that CM Akhilesh Yadav flew a family to Lucknow instead of visiting them in Noida got overshadowed by what your people were saying.
Nobody reported that Mahesh Sharma (Union apportion and Noida MP) got his (Akhlaq’s) son treated by a best of doctors. Was it required for a media to contend that a Muslim family was suspended from a gymnasium personification a inhabitant anthem? They could have usually pronounced that a family was ousted. Why concentration on their eremite status? They are also citizens. When it comes to a infancy though, it is called intolerance. No other republic has given birth to as many religions as India has. So if some people contend it is finished and built intolerance, afterwards we determine with them.
Vandita Mishra: But your ministers also make statements such as Abdul Kalam was a jingoist notwithstanding being a Muslim.
If a cricketer is held in a match-fixing scandal, his minority standing gets highlighted. A film star whose cinema are appreciated by crores of people remembers his minority standing usually when a Enforcement Directorate summons him. Instead of looking during someone as holding a minority status, see him as a citizen.
Unni Rajen Shanker: You talked about amicable media. Do we consider it is inspiring a approach a supervision reacts to Pakistan?
Yes. we have privately seen people on amicable media plainly observant no to this (cricket series). But how does a common male consider and how does a supervision think? we was a one who took a dwindle from Kolkata to Kashmir when some-more than 2,000 soldiers were harmed when separatists pelted stones during them. we did a 3,000-km yatra, yet demeanour during what they ask me now. When there was a banishment in Gurdaspur, a contributor came to me and said, ‘Border pe banishment ho rahi hai. Cricket kheloge (There’s banishment on a limit and we wish to play cricket)?’.
Maneesh Chhibber: Who decides a seductiveness of a republic — people on Twitter or those on TV channels?
Ours is a supervision that has won with a outrageous majority. The people of India have placed their trust in (Prime Minister Narendra Modi), so let him take a final call in a seductiveness of a nation.
Sheela Bhatt: The BCCI doesn’t accurately suffer a good image. What are we doing to urge that?
If we had asked me this doubt 9 months ago, we would have concluded with you. When we took over as Honorary Secretary of a BCCI, a Board, we agree, was in a ICU. But today, after 9 months, we have taken some stairs that have brought us a good name. Look during how a conflict-of-interest emanate was handled. Also, compartment 2014, there was frequency any media communication with a BCCI office-bearers. The day we took over, we motionless that we will correlate with a media — whatever decisions we take, we am going to answer all a questions. After each preference cabinet meeting, we have a press conference. Every preference is put adult on a website and press releases sent out.
Sheela Bhatt: Very soon, Rahul Gandhi is approaching to spin a boss of a Congress. The assign of being partial of dynastic politics also relates to you.
I am unapproachable of my father, Prem Kumar Dhumal, who spent some-more than 30 years in open life. At a same time, when we used to play cricket for Punjab — we was captain of a under-16, under-19 teams – we used a name Anurag Singh Thakur. we took a preference in Class IX that that is how we would write my name. The suspicion during that time was that if we played for my country, no one should contend that he is personification given he is a politician’s son. Ultimately, we have to deliver. we have won a 14th, 15th and 16th Lok Sabha elections. The voter decides your future, your fate.
Ajay Shankar: Last year, there was a radical takeover of a ICC by a BCCI, Cricket Australia and a England Cricket Board. At that time, this was hailed as a good pierce – we too had corroborated it… Now, we have a BCCI boss holding a U-turn and observant that a pierce was bad, and that everybody should go behind to a prior arrangement. What is your position on this today?
First, a (BCCI) boss pronounced this in his personal capacity. He finished it unequivocally pure that it was his personal opinion. You have to know that India plays a very, unequivocally critical purpose in universe cricket. It’s usually India that has a track in probably each state. The income we have been generating in a final so many years has been spent on a ground. The Indian subcontinent contributes tighten to 70 per cent of a ICC’s revenues. To take 21 per cent of that is not much. That was a position with Australia and England progressing and no one objected to it then. If this happens to India today, we shouldn’t intent to it.
Ajay Shankar: Do we determine with a BCCI chief’s personal opinion?
I consider we have to demeanour during a altogether design and particular opinions could be different. we might disagree, yet a final call has to be taken by a BCCI given it is not usually in a seductiveness of one association, it is in a seductiveness of 30 units of a BCCI.
Shailaja Bajpi: Could we criticism on a discuss over a peculiarity of a pitches? (Nagpur representation got a ‘poor’ rating from a ICC after a third India-South Africa Test finished in 3 days).
I consider a plead on a peculiarity of pitches is overhyped, like a dogmatism debate. When a review gets over in dual days — maybe in some other partial of a world, like Australia in 3 days — nobody raises that question. But when we see a lot of drawn matches, like in a final few years, we contend nobody will come and watch Test cricket.
I have a doubt to ask about a Nagpur match. Ask any ex-cricketer, how many players from a dual teams played a bad shot? Was there disproportionate bounce? No. Was there some-more spin than expected? Yes, maybe. But in many tools of a universe such as Australia and South Africa, we will see most some-more rebound in a pitches. In England, we will see some-more join and swing. So how do we review that? In India and Pakistan, we might see some-more branch tracks. That is a inlet of a pitches, that we call home advantage.
Sandeep Dwivedi: You have been a cricketer. When have we final seen a round branch from Day 1? The other worrying partial is Ravi Shastri saying, ‘To ruin with 5 days of cricket, we are excellent with three’. If we contend that this is a template to play during home, isn’t that a worrying sign?
Not really. Nobody questioned a T20 and a ODI games. What about a pitches when South Africa won? But when India won dual Test matches, we start lifting questions.
Sandeep Dwivedi: It’s a ICC that is lifting questions.
But what is a pattern for a good representation and bad pitch? Was a rebound uneven, were there injuries? The ICC has sent us a minute and we will shortly respond to that. But we consider there is zero wrong if a Test review finishes on a fourth day or a third day. You should also demeanour during a batting standards. Remember how Dravid, Laxman play ed on these kinds of tracks?
Sandeep Dwivedi: Once players retire, they start academies and are also partial of a BCCI. Will a new rule, that says that in box we have blurb interests we can't be a BCCI administrator, be formidable to implement?
Not really. We have attempted to be transparent. we consider it (the conflict-of-interest clause) creates one unwavering about what he is doing. If they run an academy and are one of a selectors, of march there is going to be dispute of interest.
Nihal Koshie: Why has it taken a BCCI a swat from a Supreme Court-appointed cabinet to purify up?
I had pronounced that Mr Srinivasan contingency step aside so that we can have a satisfactory probe. we plainly pronounced that to a media. That led to a conditions where we had to competition and afterwards spin a secretary. Now that we am in a pivotal position, with a knowledge of Mr Jagmohan Dalmiya and his blessings, we have taken all a steps. And with Mr Shashank Manohar entrance in, giving things a most improved pace, we are perplexing to grasp what we can. You can contend that given of a SC committee, this (clean-up) has happened, yet we were forced to take these stairs given Mr Srinivasan was not holding any preference in a seductiveness of a board.
Ajay Shankar: You spoke about how we were a initial to ask Srinivasan to step down. But during one point, Srinivasan was a best thing to have happened to Indian cricket. What went wrong?
When we contend that Lalit Modi brought in income or Mr Srinivasan brought in money, we consider a credit goes to Mr Jagmohan Dalmiya and (Inderjit Singh) Bindra and Mr N K P Salve. Look during a 1983 World Cup-winning team. The BCCI didn’t have even Rs 1 crore to honour them. It was Lata Mangeshkar who came brazen and helped a BCCI honour a 1983 champions. But given then, a BCCI has finished a lot, either to quarrel opposite Prasar Bharati, win a justice conflict and finally move income into cricket. All this can’t be finished by one person. Over 3 decades, a tough work put in by several office-bearers of a Board has paid off. It is a common bid of a BCCI.
Sandeep Dwivedi: For a 2016 T20 World Cup, will we be means to organize a Pakistan review in Mumbai, given that a Shiv Sena’s protests forced a ICC to repel Pakistani referee Aleem Dar from a India-South Africa series?
No, we can’t, given nobody wants to get into a conditions that could means annoyance to a country. We have so many centres in this republic that can horde a Pakistan match.
Vandita Mishra: Do we consider that given a new electoral setbacks in Delhi, Bihar and farming Gujarat, there is a need for thoughtfulness on where a supervision is headed?
Yes, there is a doctrine to be learnt from what happened in Delhi and Bihar and we are looking into a details. Our PM is putting in a lot of effort. There is a lot of bid to get investments. There is already a 40 per cent boost in FDI from Oct 2014 to Apr 2015, that clearly shows that his (PM’s) tough work is profitable off. Now that a economy has started doing well, we need to take certain decisions like flitting a GST Bill. But a Opposition is ruin focussed on not vouchsafing that happen. Rahul Gandhi contingency answer because he is restraint GST.
Vandita Mishra: When a supervision talks about Congress mukt Bharat, we are, in a sense, undermining a establishment of a Opposition. Don’t we consider there is some shortcoming on a partial of a supervision too, to strech out and rivet some-more respectfully with a Opposition?
When it comes to a country, both parties should come together. GST will pull expansion adult by 1-1.5 per cent. So doesn’t a Congress celebration have a same shortcoming as a BJP to boost growth? When Rahul Gandhi raises questions about a efficacy of Make in India and Swachh Bharat campaigns, afterwards no matter how most we try and pull aside a people of this country, they will respond saying, ‘Yes, it is working’.
P Chidambaramji said, ‘Attack me directly, not harass friends of my son’. What do we meant by ‘direct attack’? There were raids conducted on companies associated to your son. Not a singular member of a Congress celebration has oral in his favour.
Transcribed by Shantanu David Somya Lakhani