Calcutta: For most of the past 10 days, the Pakistan Cricket Board dominated headlines... In the last 48 or so hours, Sri Lanka Cricket took up space... Monday onwards, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) should monopolise headlines.
In all probability, not very flattering.
If the BCCI brass indeed is wary of what Justice (retd) Rajendra Mal Lodha and his colleagues will recommend, on the administrative front, then their apprehensions don't appear misplaced.
[Also on tenterhooks must be Sundar Raman, former COO of the IPL, who is now employed by Mukesh Ambani's Reliance.]
Justices (retd) Ashok Bhan and Raju Varadarajulu Raveendran complete the Supreme Court-appointed panel which submitted the non-BCCI part of its report in July.
But why wariness?
Because the BCCI functions as an exclusive club largely governed by the principles of give-and-take. In effect, accountability is almost zero.
And, of course, it doesn't help when affiliates like the Delhi & District Cricket Association get probed by the Central Bureau of Investigation.
Particularly irritating is that it doesn't take long for just about everybody in the BCCI to switch sides.
Loyalty? Allegiance? Both are unheard of in the BCCI.
Benefits - like, for example, managerships and being named on committees - alone matter.
It's amusing that most of the men who'd allowed Narayanswami Srinivasan to do as he liked, whether as the BCCI president or as a power centre without a designation, endorsed Shashank Manohar's call to clear the mess.
But should they first not be held accountable for looking the other way when Srinivasan ran riot?
Manohar, current president of the BCCI and chairman of the International Cricket Council, was then not in office, but credit to him for being consistent with his stand on corruption.
Even the late Jagmohan Dalmiya was reluctant to take on Srinivasan directly.
Manohar is sharp and, on returning as the BCCI president, in October, realised that Justice Lodha and his colleagues could really tighten the screws put in place by the Supreme Court.
So, on November 9, Manohar announced the appointment of Justice (retd) Ajit Prakash Shah as the BCCI's first ombudsman.
Justice Shah was once the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court and is now chairman of the country's Law Commission.
That day itself, key players in the BCCI privately conceded that Justice Shah's appointment was an attempt to "impress" the Justice Lodha panel.
All in the hope that the report would not be damning.
But have Justice Lodha and his brother judges actually been suitably impressed?
What about officials who've been around for decades? What about the allegations of impropriety in more than one affiliate? What about conflict of interest?
The questions are plenty.
None bigger than why the BCCI didn't think of transparency till the Supreme Court intervened?
It's worth noting that quite a few invited to give their views by Justice Lodha and his colleagues came away "rattled" by the questions asked.
Quite a few possibly opened the proverbial can of worms.
Had Justice Tirath Singh Thakur, currently Chief Justice of India, and Justice Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla not come down heavily almost a year ago, the BCCI wouldn't have taken any steps at all.
"Hail Srini" would still have been the BCCI's anthem.
Some associated with the BCCI have suggested that the Justice Lodha panel's recommendations will not be binding. That's strange, to say the least.
Surely, what was good in July, has to be good now as well.
Back in July, the BCCI had been quick to implement the same panel's recommendations on the two-year suspension of Chennai Super Kings and the Rajasthan Royals.
How can the BCCI take a different stand if the recommendations are drastic and affect many within with little or no accountability?
To suggest such a line is fraught with danger. For one, Justice Thakur is now the Chief Justice. Secondly, Manohar takes pride in being a man with high credibility. He wouldn't want his image to take a hit.
Justice (retd) Mukul Mudgal, Justice Thakur and, now, Justice Lodha... We owe a debt of gratitude to the judges.
It's interesting that many in the ICC are tracking developments and, according to well-placed sources of The Telegraph, will begin "assessing" the possible fallout of the recommendations.
Thanks to Srinivasan's approach, many in the ICC see the BCCI as a bully. That would explain the keen interest in what the Justice Lodha panel puts forward before the Supreme Court.
Indications are that few in the BCCI may enjoy Monday's lunch. Justice Lodha has called a media conference sharp at noon.
