‘At least know how to hold a bat’: SC takes swipe at non-cricketers running cricket bodies

The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday took jibe on cricket administrators with no sport background, observing that cricket associations should ideally be run by former cricketers, not people who “do not even know how to handle a bat”.

Hearing pleas challenging the Bombay High Court order staying the Maharashtra Cricket Association (MCA) elections, a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant made it clear it was in no mood to rescue cricket bodies from their own googlies.

The court declined to interfere with the HC’s stay on the January 6 polls, which were halted amid allegations of nepotism and favouritism — charges that have become almost as familiar to Indian cricket administration as the toss.

What particularly raised the bench’s eyebrows was the MCA’s sudden love for expansion. Records showed that the association had just 164 members between 1986 and 2023, followed by a dramatic surge soon after.

“From 1986 to 2023, you had 164 members, and from 2023 onwards, you made a bumper draw?” the CJI asked, sounding less impressed than a selector watching padded averages.

Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the MCA and NCP (SP) MLA Rohit Pawar, argued that a committee headed by a retired judge had overseen inductions, rejecting 48 applications. He also questioned the Charity Commissioner’s appointment of an administrator without cabinet consultation.

But the bench was unmoved. If membership had to be expanded, the CJI said, those seats should have gone to retired international cricketers.

“This is one country where outstanding cricketers are there. Those who have retired were the best in line,” he said, before adding the line that stole the show: “Who are you bringing? Those who do not even know the game… do not even know how to handle a bat.”

Without naming names, the remarks landed squarely in a cricketing ecosystem where administrators with zero playing experience — from state units to the national level — routinely call the shots, a trend exemplified by figures like Jay Shah, who rose through cricket governance without a professional playing career.

The bench underlined a basic truth often forgotten in boardrooms: sports bodies exist because of players, not administrators.

“Cricket is because of cricketers. Hockey is because of hockey players. At least this much respect should be given,” the CJI said.

The legal battle began after former India cricketer Kedar Jadhav approached the Bombay High Court, alleging the MCA voter list had been “rigged” through the induction of nearly 401 new members, many allegedly linked to political and business interests.

Allowing the petitioners to withdraw their appeals, the Supreme Court sent the matter back to the High Court, asking it to hear the case expeditiously — and perhaps reminding cricket’s powerbrokers that knowing the rules of the game should start with knowing the game itself.