Calcutta, May 13 :     Manoj Prabhakar and Inderjit Singh Bindra have 'revived' interest in the Singer Cup of September, 1994, but neither has talked about the infamous West Indies game (Wills World Series), in Kanpur, six weeks after the Colombo tournament. Earlier this week, former national selector and team physio-cum-doctor Ravinder Chadha did call on Prabhakar to 'clear his position' vis-a-vis that Kanpur match (October 30, 1994), but it didn't make the headlines it ought to have. This evening, however, Bindra told The Telegraph he will mention 'everything he knows, from 1979 onwards' in his report to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). 'It will include Kanpur,' he added. But, will that be good enough? Bindra, significantly, was then Board president. A re-cap, perhaps, won't be out of place today: Prabhakar, who even shouldered-arms during the slog overs, and Nayan Mongia batted as if they were saving a Test instead of trying to win a one-day game. Thanks to their 'effort', India finished on 211 for five to lose by 46 runs. Prabhakar and Mongia added as many as 16 in the last 43 deliveries. Prabhakar, who remained unbeaten on 102, claimed there were 'no instructions' from the team management to speed things up! So incensed was the Green Park crowd, no one applauded Prabhakar's century. The temperature in the dressing room, too, reached boiling-point. Prabhakar made things worse by unleashing a volley of invectives. The target: Mohammed Azharuddin, the then captain. The-then national selectors Gundappa Vishwanath and Chadha witness the tamasha in person. Mongia, most agree, was a 'bit-player' only. Cricket manager Ajit Wadekar and Azhar ask Bindra and the-then Board secretary, Jagmohan Dalmiya, to have Prabhakar (and Mongia) dropped. Vishy and Chadha, too, echo similar sentiments. The next day, Prabhakar and Mongia are excluded for the remaining two matches. The Board's top brass suspects match-fixing but that isn't put on record. Rahul Dravid and Vijay Yadav named replacements. Four days later, Match Referee Raman Subba Row deducts two points from India's tally. It's an act without precedent. The reason: 'India had not played competently in the best interests of the game.' There is talk of extending Prabhakar and Mongia's suspension. That a 'more firm' message needs to be conveyed to everybody. Inexplicably, their suspension isn't extended. Instead, both Prabhakar and Mongia return for the one-dayers against the West Indies, immediately after the WWS final in Calcutta. Both sign a letter of apology. Prabhakar's letter, drafted by Dalmiya, more strongly worded. Intriguingly, Prabhakar turned up in Calcutta (during the India-West Indies final), even though the Board hadn't asked him to. Apparently, the unofficial 'invitation' went from a senior Board official. Clearly, the Board allowed an excellent opportunity to simply slip away. An inquiry then itself could have ended the unethical dealings which some Indian cricketers today stand accused of. Incidentally, the Kanpur fiasco occured well before the Salim Malik scandal - which recast the way people look at cricket. Despite adopting a hardline approach, initially, Dalmiya was one of those who relented. The question is: Why did he acquiesce to their recall, specially Prabhakar's? This afternoon, Dalmiya, now the International Cricket Council (ICC) president, gave his version. 'The-then Board president (Bindra) intervened... I recall having refused to speak to Prabhakar (when he turned up in Calcutta), but did so only after Mr Bindra spoke to me. I agree I was, initially, firm on setting an example.' While acknowledging he did ask Dalmiya to 'speak' to Prabhakar, Bindra insisted it was 'only to conduct a preliminary inquiry.' Speaking from Chandigarh, Bindra added: 'No report (to the Board) suggested match-fixing and, that's why, no formal inquiry was initiated. I remember speaking to Vishy who, too, didn't talk on those (match-fixing) lines.' To 'clear' his position, Bindra pointed out the decision to recall Prabhakar (and Mongia) was 'entirely taken by the selectors.' Fact, however, remains no team is announced without the explicit consent of the Board president. Bindra, therefore, should have begun the 'cleansing'-act back in late 1994 instead of mid-2000. Significantly four months after Kanpur, N.Venkata Rao, manager to the Centenary Quadrangular in New Zealand, called for Prabhakar's ouster from the team. He didn't put down match-fixing in black-and-white, but this one observation (in his report to Bindra) is telling: '... I feel it is better if we do away with him (Prabhakar) in the larger interest of the team.' For the record, Bindra didn't act on that report. Certainly, there is no evidence to suggest he did - Prabhakar quit on his own, in a huff, after the 1996 World Cup. Meanwhile, it's now confirmed a special general body meeting of the Board will be held, in New Delhi on May 20, a day after the working committee meets there. It will be surprising if Rao's report and the Kanpur issue aren't discussed.