Commentators Sunil Gavaskar and Ravi Shastri Endorsed by BCCI

For those watching cricket these days, if one felt that a commentator had changed his style and pandering to a certain section, here’s why. The day broke with the news that a couple of former Indian cricketers were getting annual pay cheques from the BCCI and it was not for being on the IPL governing council but rather in a unique proposition where the BCCI has hired them to be commentators not only on the game that takes place on the field but also, off field.

Sunil Gavaskar

A leading newspaper in Mumbai published an expose of sorts when they stated that Sunil Gavaskar and Ravi Shastri were on the BCCI’s pay roll not for their role on the IPL but rather for the commentator’s role. Before someone says, come again, the understanding reportedly is for both gentlemen to make sumptuous crores for annually voicing opinions that reflect the BCCI’s stance on several issues. Therefore, it would be effective to consider that a word against the BCCI would not be making them the revenue but being in favour of the BCCI would ensure that they were hired by every broadcaster who won the rights to telecast India’s international matches.

It is not quite clear if any more or how many are involved in a similar deal with the BCCI. But it certainly puts the association under the scanner more so because it drags the role of the commentator into the nexus. Traditionally the role of the neutral voice who brings to the table the facts, his views and analysis of how the game eventually evolves, the commentator is expected to hit the balance between passion and objectivity while also, capturing the passion of fans, the perspectives of boards and yet present a line of reasoning that is uniquely his own that may or may not agree with the establishment.

That the commentator is the unofficial mouthpiece for the board’s agenda sits rather uneasily with cricket audience who rather prefer the unadulterated, unprejudiced voice of reason rather than one that merely mouths off well rehearsal lines of defense. That is the general understanding if indeed a deal has been struck between the board and commentators wherein it is not just about securing jobs but also, furthering certain agendas, which the board is entitled to because it pays them to. If that is the case then it becomes difficult to decipher the voice of the experienced former cricketer from the man who is being paid to say certain things.

And that is perhaps the real concern as far as fans are concerned. It is not their concern so much as to who much an ex player is earning for his services as much as what is being asked for him in return. It may still be a case where the former cricketer or a commentator gets to speak his mind but the chances that his opposing views to the board will not necessarily be tolerated too often comes as part of the territory which essentially means that the commentator is sometimes reduced to being the board’s PR agent which does not comprise the gamut of the role of a commentator.

The next time a commentator cheers a little too loud to generate the hype or has clearly changed his original text and style where he was appreciated for his fair, objective view of things to now occupy a quiet role when it comes to voicing opinions, particularly those that go against the establishment or don’t speak in favour of the team, but is loud on everything else but the traditional cricket commentator’s sphere of elaboration, the suspicions are only getting confirmed is one way of putting it.