Special Correspondent
Sometimes, a lengthy defence does more damage than the allegation itself. The latest response of the “controversial” club secretary of the Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA), ostensibly questioning why this e-paper chose to highlight the controversy surrounding his club, is a classic example.
Instead of addressing the substantive issues raised, he appears more concerned about why OrangeNews9 chose to report them at all. In the process, however, he has inadvertently acknowledged one of the very issues this e-paper has repeatedly highlighted—the continuing internal battles within the HCA. That admission itself deserves greater attention.
Why did OrangeNews9 flag the alleged “duplicate” registration issue concerning his club? The answer is simple: it was not manufactured by this e-paper. The issue arose from a complaint reportedly made by the original playground custodian and senior Congress leader V. Hanumantha Rao, including a representation before the State High Court-appointed Single Member Committee (SMC) and the HCA Secretary. When a formal complaint concerning an affiliated cricket club reaches a statutory or judicially constituted mechanism, is it really the responsibility of the media to bury it?
Of course not.
The job of a responsible media organisation is to place relevant facts, complaints and competing claims before its readers. It is not to issue certificates of good conduct to office-bearers, nor is it required to seek permission from those occupying positions in a sports association before asking uncomfortable questions.
And certainly, OrangeNews9 does not need a “certificate” from any faction of the HCA for doing its journalistic duty.
The larger question is: why has the HCA repeatedly found itself embroiled in internal disputes, legal battles and interventions? The Supreme Court’s intervention in the affairs of cricket administration and the subsequent acceptance and implementation of the Justice Lodha Committee recommendations was intended precisely to bring greater transparency, accountability and institutional discipline into cricket administration. That being continue even by the state High Court too in HCA alleged financial irregularities and other petitions.
If those principles have not been fully internalised by every state association, that is a legitimate subject for public discussion. Whether the HCA has implemented every aspect of the Lodha reforms in letter and spirit is a matter that can be examined separately.
What is certainly not acceptable is for elected office-bearers to demand silence from the media while cricket administration remains mired in controversies.
Over the years, several people associated with the HCA, including former officials and persons familiar with its functioning, have privately admitted to this author that factionalism and vested interests have often overshadowed the promotion of cricket. Some have even challenged anyone to identify a sizeable number of affiliated clubs prepared to openly question wrongdoing without worrying about future favours, nominations, committee positions, tours or other benefits.
That is precisely the ecosystem that needs scrutiny.
The problem does not end with administrators. The growing desperation among parents of aspiring young cricketers also deserves attention. There are disturbing allegations that some private academies exploit parental ambitions by promising places in junior teams or selection pathways. If such practices exist, they constitute a serious threat to merit-based cricket.
The comparison with the coaching-centre culture in education is not entirely misplaced. Parents are sometimes persuaded to spend enormous amounts in the hope that their children will become the next Sachin Tendulkar, Kapil Dev, Virat Kohli or Rohit Sharma. The answer, however, should be performance—not money, influence or connections.
That is why the example of young Vaibhav Suryavanshi is worth remembering: talent ultimately has to speak for itself.
The HCA should therefore be holding awareness meetings with aspiring cricketers and their parents, warning them against anyone promising selection in exchange for money or influence. If allegations of a “pay-to-play” ecosystem exist, they deserve investigation—not denial, intimidation or diversion.
Coming back to the ‘controversial’ club secretary’s own message reportedly circulated in an HCA WhatsApp group raises another important question: why attack the messenger instead of answering the issue?
If the club’s registration and ownership are beyond question, the appropriate response is straightforward—produce the records, place the facts before the SMC and settle the matter transparently.
Likewise, if the secretary believes he has a legitimate institutional objection to another office-bearer, he should pursue it through the proper constitutional mechanism. Personal insinuations against the editor of a publication raising questions do not answer documentary or procedural issues.
And let nobody mistake criticism for opposition to cricket.
OrangeNews9 wants the HCA to succeed—but succeed as a cricketing institution, not as a battlefield for competing factions. The association needs better infrastructure, more playing facilities, transparent administration and genuine opportunities for talented youngsters across Telangana.
The BCCI funds and cricketing resources available to the HCA should ultimately translate into better facilities and a stronger talent pipeline. After decades of administration, stakeholders are entitled to ask a simple question: what lasting cricketing infrastructure has been created across Telangana commensurate with the resources available to the association?
Those who have faced allegations or are currently dealing with inquiries or legal proceedings should use those forums to clear their names. They should not expect the media to stop asking questions merely because the questions are uncomfortable.
And to those who believe veiled threats, personal attacks or attempts to question the integrity of journalists will silence OrangeNews9, the message is unambiguous:
It will not.
If there are facts that contradict what we publish, send them. If there are documents, produce them. If there are errors, point them out and we will examine them.
But personal attacks are not rebuttals. Insinuations are not evidence. And intimidation is certainly not transparency.
OrangeNews9 will continue to report complaints as complaints, allegations as allegations and established facts as facts. We will also give every concerned person an opportunity to present his or her side.
The objective is not to protect one faction against another. It is to ensure that the HCA becomes bigger than its office-bearers, that cricket becomes bigger than its internal politics, and that the interests of genuine young cricketers prevail over vested interests.
Those who are confident that they have nothing to hide should welcome scrutiny.
After all, sunlight is not the enemy of an institution that is clean.
