When an exposé begins to hurt, those thriving on rot inevitably strike back—not with facts, but with intimidation, insinuation and entitlement. That moment has arrived.
Following the publication of this e-paper’s article, “When Merit Is Benched: How HCA Keeps Sabotaging Its Own Future,” a private academy promoter—widely known in cricketing circles as a “broker,” though unnamed here in the interest of legal propriety—took it upon himself to call and question this newsroom. His grievance was not about factual inaccuracies. His discomfort stemmed from exposure.
The reaction, though expected, was not expected to be confrontational. One would assume the questions would centre around selection policies or team management. Instead, the nature of the call only confirmed what we have been writing all along—that the show is often run from outside the system, and merit does not always prevail.
That call, ironically, only reinforced what this publication has consistently documented: the Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA) remains a deeply compromised institution where brokers, influence-peddlers, and political interests allegedly hold sway, while merit is routinely sacrificed at the altar of money and patronage.
The individual in question runs two private academies. He does not possess any notable cricketing pedigree or coaching credentials that would ordinarily warrant influence over state selections. What he appears to have perfected, however, is the art of using people as resources—discarding them once their purpose is served and moving on in search of new ones.
According to multiple parents and insiders who have spoken off the record, he allegedly collects substantial sums from families under the promise—explicit or implied—that their children will gain entry into HCA age-group teams, from Under-16 through Under-23. It is projected as a one-stop solution—mentoring, leagues, exposure, and, allegedly, selection influence. Dreams are sold, and what often follows is despair.
The tragedy is twofold. First, desperate parents mortgage their futures chasing a rigged dream. Second, genuinely gifted cricketers—those without the means or willingness to pay—are pushed to the margins.
What makes this more disturbing are allegations that such brokers operate in proximity to selectors, members of the truncated Apex Council, and other power centres, including former cricketers who allegedly control multiple affiliated clubs through benami arrangements. These clubs, sources claim, function less as sporting institutions and more as vote banks and influence hubs.
HCA today functions under the oversight of a former High Court judge, Justice Naveen Rao, appointed to oversee day-to-day administration. Yet, even under judicial supervision, the selection process continues to attract serious allegations of manipulation and bias.
This e-paper has repeatedly urged government agencies—the ACB, CID, Vigilance Department—and Central agencies such as the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Income Tax Department to examine the financial trajectories of past and present HCA office-bearers over the last 15 years. These appeals are not rhetorical. They are rooted in observable realities: assets allegedly far exceeding known income streams and a persistent pattern of impunity.
Yes, cases have been registered. Yes, arrests have occurred. But bail was quickly secured, and accountability evaporated just as swiftly. Enforcement without sustained prosecution is little more than theatre.
Whispers within cricketing circles suggest that the present government, much like its predecessor, explored ways to take control of HCA by amending its constitution through a Special General Body Meeting—an attempt to engineer electoral outcomes rather than reform governance.
Hyderabad cricket has seen this film before. Under the previous regime, elections eventually took place only after Supreme Court intervention. Even then, a politically connected individual—who had earlier headed an entirely unrelated sports body—was parachuted into HCA, winning the presidency by a solitary vote. The defeated candidate, sources allege, chose not to challenge the result.
Cricket, it seems, has become collateral damage in political chess.
The broker who contacted this newsroom went so far as to ask why the son of a former Indian Test cricketer was not named in our critique—suggesting that the young player had been replaced by someone from his own academy. The irony is telling. Those he now accuses were once, by his own admission, beneficiaries of his patronage. It appears he cannot tolerate even a slight deviation from the scripts he seeks to write.
Let it be stated clearly and responsibly: the son of the revered former Indian Test cricketer is himself a talented player with credible performances. His inclusion at the tail end of a 15-member squad does not negate his merit. What is deeply troubling, however, is the prolonged delay and resistance he reportedly faced despite consistent performances—raising an uncomfortable question: why does Hyderabad struggle to respect and nurture its own icons?
Across India, sons of cricketing greats—Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Virender Sehwag—have been integrated into state systems based on performance. Hyderabad, by contrast, appears determined to sabotage even its own inheritance.
The Numbers Don’t Lie
If selections were purely merit-based, the following statistics would be impossible to ignore:
Shrey Singh (Raju Cricket Club)
* Matches: 8
* Runs: 668
* Centuries: 4
* Fifties: 2
* Fourth-highest run-scorer in B Division
Yet, he continues to wait for a state cap.
Mohammed Mosiq Uddin (Continental CC)
* Matches: 9
* Runs: 450
* Centuries: 2
* Fifties: 2
VVS Sarvajit (Manchester CC)
* Matches: 8
* Runs: 414
* Centuries: 2
* Fifties: 1
There are several other names which, despite consistent performances, are not even part of the discussion. Teams appear to be constructed on whimsical ideas, with the primary objective of accommodating favourites. When results do not follow, others are rotated in merely to deflect attention and manage optics.
More disturbingly, performance statistics of probables were reportedly removed from the official app—an act that raises serious questions about transparency, intent, and accountability.
Why This Fight Will Continue
This e-paper has no personal vendetta. Its only allegiance is to the game and to young cricketers whose careers are being quietly strangled. That is why we will continue to demand:
* A comprehensive probe by ED and IT authorities into the wealth accumulation of HCA officials
* Transparent, data-driven and publicly auditable selection processes
* Protection for whistle-blowers, parents and players who speak up
* An end to broker-driven cricket governance
If exposing corruption invites hostile phone calls, so be it. Silence would be the greater crime.
Hyderabad cricket does not need brokers. It needs courage, accountability—and above all, merit.
And this publication will not stop asking uncomfortable questions until the game is returned to those who play it, not those who profit from it.
