Our Sports Dek
As this e-paper continues to report on alleged irregularities within the Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA), signs of growing frustration among certain stakeholders are beginning to surface. Some individuals, expressing dissatisfaction over what they perceive as inaction, have pointed to the lack of visible progress from the High Court-appointed Supervisory Committee led by Justice Naveen Rao, as well as delays in matters where hearings are understood to have concluded but orders are awaited. Concerns have also been informally raised regarding the pace of action by state investigative agencies such as the ACB and CID.
In this backdrop, an anonymous email—purportedly from a stakeholder—has begun circulating, seeking attention to what it describes as alleged “pay-to-play” practices in league cricket. The communication also claims that sections of the media have not adequately highlighted these concerns. The contents of the email, however, remain unverified, and there is no independent confirmation of the allegations made.
The timing of the message, coinciding with the start of the league season, has brought renewed attention to the issue. Unlike general or informal claims, the email sets out what it describes as a structured “rate card” for player participation.
Among the assertions made are specific figures—₹2.5 lakh allegedly for securing an opening batting slot or a full bowling quota, and ₹1–1.5 lakh for other playing positions. The message further claims that certain teams may be operating with margins of around ₹10 lakh. These figures are part of the anonymous communication and have not been independently substantiated.
The email also outlines what it alleges to be a broader system linked to team formation, involving financial arrangements between academies, agents, and individuals described as being close to association circles. It suggests that, in some instances, teams may be managed outside conventional club structures, with player roles informally “priced” depending on format and perceived importance.
Further, the communication makes references to varying financial expectations across formats, describing “A Division” as “a good mine,” and indicating that different formats such as two-day and one-day cricket may operate under separate structures. These claims remain part of the unverified narrative presented in the email.
A notable aspect of the message is its level of detail. It reportedly names certain clubs, academies, agents, and office-bearers in connection with the alleged practices. However, these references are contained within an anonymous communication, and no corroborating evidence is currently available in the public domain to support these claims.
The matter has also reportedly been escalated beyond private circulation. Sources indicate that the email has been marked to Justice Naveen Rao, along with HCA office-bearers including the President, Vice President, and CEO. It is also understood to have been forwarded to senior police officials in the state. While this escalation may prompt closer attention, there is no official confirmation at this stage of any inquiry or कार्रवाई initiated based on the email.
The message includes several strongly worded statements, such as “This is not cricket. This is business,” and claims that “poor and talented players are getting no chance,” along with the broader assertion that “everyone has a rate.” These statements reflect the views expressed by the anonymous sender and have not been independently verified.
The issue, as raised in the communication, touches upon a broader and sensitive concern regarding transparency and merit in league cricket. Even unverified claims of financial influence, if left unaddressed, can contribute to perceptions that opportunities may not be based solely on performance.
At present, the email remains an anonymous and unverified account. However, its circulation, level of detail, and reported escalation to authorities have brought the matter into wider discussion. Whether these claims lead to any formal examination or are clarified through official responses remains to be seen.
