Why would Kale offer money?

It appears to have all the hallmarks of a cheap, racy thriller. Subterfuge, cloak-n-dagger action, dirty linen, big money, and now, it seems, even sex.

The stone flung at Abhijit Kale by Kiran More and Pranab Roy has set off waves that threaten to engulf the fiefdom of Mr Jagmohan Dalmiya.

Completely unintended, I am sure, by More and Roy. After all, both have a stake in maintaining the power structure that goes by the name of the Board of Control for Cricket in India.

Also Read The selection scam - complete coverage

The second issue, which is evolving even as I write, is whether the selectors and the Board have their own closet full of skeletons that they desperately want to hide. Ironical, considering that less than a week ago the Damoclean sword was well and truly hanging over Kale.

But now with former Hyderabad Ranji player Vanka Pratap accusing the selectors of wanting grease for their palms and leggie Narendra Hirwani calling the wise men dishonest, the sword seems to have lost its edge.

Let's take the bull by its horns. Did Kale offer money? The possibility of such a scenario cannot be ruled out. After all here was a talented cricketer, just about on the right side of thirty, a prolific scorer in the domestic circuit, with 24 tons and an average in excess of 58, and still not getting anywhere. Except for one Limited Overs International in Dhaka.

With Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Sourav Ganguly and V V S Laxman packing the Indian middle order, one can't blame Kale if he felt time was running out on him. Trying to dislodge any of these four giants is a tough proposition. So Kale perhaps thought he could have eased his way in with a little help from Goddess Lakshmi.

But then the perfectly fitting pieces of the jigsaw suddenly start jutting out when one considers what the BCCI first said -- Kale offered two selectors money to be part of an India A side. The team is currently taking on Sri Lanka's A team.

One reason why someone could offer money to get into a team is to make some money. But, according to one former Indian cricketer, the maximum a cricketer can hope to make on an India A tour is Rs 3,00,000. That too if the tour is to or from an 'A' list country -- England, Australia or South Africa.

If it is to or from a country like Sri Lanka, the cricketer can hope to make a maximum of Rs 1,00,000. Now would any sane man offer to pay Rs 20 lakh for a return of Rs 3,00,000?

The second plausible reason for offering that kind of money could be if the cricketer does not have the domestic record to back him up, but still wants to be part of the elite set. Kale's domestic record doesn't let such logic stand for even a minute. In fact Kale has been a regular in the India A side.

When the case against Kale suddenly appeared to be on shaky ground, Dalmiya intervened. He said Kale had offered money to the selectors for 'a place in the national team'. Curious, for Dalmiya seemed to know more about the episode than the selectors themselves.

Anyway, for Dalmiya's sake, the third plausible reason could be if Kale wanted to get into the senior team. But even this logic stands on thin ice from a purely economic point of view. Even if Kale were chosen for the Indian team, he would have made just a little in excess of Rs 30 lakh, that too if he is part of both the Test and LOI teams. Would he then have offered two selectors two-thirds of his gains?

A player gets Rs 2,75,000 as match fees for a Test and Rs 2,25,000 for an LOI. India play four Tests against Australia and a tri-series involving Zimbabwe. India will play at least eight, and a maximum of 11, LOIs in the series. That would allow Kale to make Rs 29-35 lakh, or a net earning of Rs 9-15 lakh. Not smart economics, considering that the sum will not even suffice to buy a decent flat in Mumbai.

From a cricketing point of view, why should a player try to bribe his way into the Indian team when he cannot realistically hope to get into the playing eleven, unless, of course, one of the big four is injured or he manages to get someone injured. A situation trifle too dramatic, one any bookie worth his salt would not bet on.

You have to play if you want to be retained -- to earn money, laurels or both. Performance then becomes the key, for both monetary and cricketing reasons. Would you invest in a business proposition where the returns will come just once and at half the rate of what you invested? I think not.

Another question that merits an answer is why More and Roy made the allegation now, an allegation that raises more questions than answers. Was it personal animosity? Could it be that the selectors themselves demanded money, as Vanka Pratap has alleged of their Hyderabad counterpart, and got the jitters when Kale refused?

We may never know the answers if the BCCI's record is anything to go by. Of course, a probe has been ordered and a report will be submitted within the stipulated 15 days. But will it provide satisfactory answers?

I doubt it, for Dalmiya has already determined the terms of reference of the probe -- did Kale offer money? The other possibility -- did the selectors ask Kale for money? -- has been ignored.

While Kale has been placed under suspension till the inquiry is completed (whatever happened to the rule of innocent until proven guilty?) Vanka Pratap has been issued a show-case notice! Shouldn't the selector/s accused by Pratap be placed suspension if still in operation? If retired, shouldn't they be probed?

But the BCCI will continue to have such pies in the face as long its structure is not radically changed to allow for transparent functioning.

Assuming again for a moment that Kale did offer a bribe. Isn't that a reflection on the BCCI's zonal selection structure where less deserving players often get into the side at the expense of more talented, better performing cricketers? Fair enough that cricket has to be promoted in all corners of the country. But surely it can't be at the cost of your national team!

Offhand, I can think of a couple of names who are already in Australia while more deserving candidates languish back home. But let's not get into the mess that goes for the selection process today.

But after the intense embarrassment of match-fixing, may I ask the BCCI what it has done to root out corruption in the game, apart from burying its head in the sand?

Shouldn't the BCCI have an independent anti-corruption unit, like the ICC has? Or does the BCCI think corruption is the patented property of government departments?

The old cliché goes that there can be no smoke without fire. And there have been far too many smoky horizons in BCCI country.

The can of worms opened by More and Roy can be used by Dalmiya, if he is serious, to clean up the system. For starters, he can do the following:

• Enlist the government's help and get the Central Bureau of Investigation to conduct a comprehensive probe.
• Break down the zonal system and replace it with a national, performance-based system.
• Revamp the Ranji format and do away with state teams. Instead, have a European football league type system.
• Reward domestic performance.
• Make domestic cricket lucrative.
• Ensure the seniors participate in domestic tournaments. It will increase the competition and let budding ones measure their worth.
• Get professional administrators and run the BCCI like a corporate organisation, not a monolith
• Identify talent and nurture it. Murali Kartik is a case of how not to do it.

These are just a few suggestions. As someone who wears a constant smile when India wins, but enters foul mood territory when the team loses the last thing I want is suspicion in my mind that the player in the middle got there by means other than cricket.