Chappell vs. Ganguly, Act 12, Scene 983

After a couple of mercifully uneventful weeks, the Ganguly-Chappell row is back in the news. Sports writers are overjoyed.

In a recent interview to the Guardian, Greg Chappell, the Indian cricket coach suggested that former Indian captain Saurav Ganguly`s efforts to remain in the team (and, in particular, remain as captain) were motivated by financial concerns as well.

This at a time when the issue has largely faded from headline news and the team, not to mention fans of the game, seem to have moved on.

Not our sports writers, though. Whether Mr Chappell intended for his comments to start a new round of crossfire isn`t known but some parts of the media have certainly leapt to Mr Ganguly`s defence. I think I know why but I am not telling.

The BCCI has been aiming to play down the matter. Several newspapers have reported Niranjan Shah, the BCCI secretary, to be concerned only with protocol. Sharad Pawar, the president, also has been reported as wanting to close the whole issue here.

But if you are a sports journalist, aching to be a political writer but not getting the chance, even this low level stuff will do. Ideally, you should simply ignore something like this and hope it will go away. But no, sir, not if you are worth your salt. You should instead make such a fuss about it that the BCCI must do something.

So the BCCI has sent an official communiqué to Mr Chappell, asking him to restrict his comments to the team. The coach has acknowledged receipt but has not said anything officially.

Can we let it rest there? No sir, of course not. Even before Mr Chappell has said anything, there has been speculation about what his response might be.

The Times of India ran an article on their website with the headline: "Chappell admits his mistake". There is no mention of the admission anywhere in the article itself, though. In fact, the headline that appears when you open the article simply says "Chappell asked to avoid controversy".

The Telegraph`s Lokendra Pratap Sahi, not surprisingly perhaps as he is from Kolkata, feels very strongly about the matter. Although increasingly resigned to Ganguly`s omission, Sahi is not too pleased with Chappell`s freedom of speech. "While Chappell`s mouth can`t be taped, he can`t keep running down India`s most successful Test captain — anybody for that matter — in the manner he has."

What is interesting though is that the newspaper`s editorials have been consistently in favour of Chappell and highly critical of Ganguly.

In a manner that can only be understood as carrying Ganguly`s brief, Mr Sahi says that "if Sourav does decide on going to court, he will seek damages for that libellous contention." Judgement before trial, of sorts.

After all, he says, "Unless Pawar himself intervenes it`s highly unlikely that Sourav is going to be recalled as long as Chappell is around. That`s till April 2007, by when he won`t be far from his 35th birthday. So, in a way, Sourav doesn`t have anything more to lose if he initiates legal proceedings."

Nothing can be done, he clarifies, until Mr Pawar replies to Ganguly`s letter.

That won`t stop the analysis, however, and the flogging will continue though the horse died last year.

 contact: khelkoodkar@gmail.com