In Dravid’s case, there has never been a doubt about that, even though he has suffered as much from the overweening ambition of leading the country that every prominent player in the country’s star system has. It is such a consuming aspiration that even Tendulkar is inclined now to take another shot at it after having confessed to failure at it.

Given such exalted thinking on Dravid’s part, what was strange then was when he came out with that outburst against the board official who had so many crass things to say about how the team rolled over on the disastrous tour of South Africa. It is not often that the soft spoken Bangalorean has used language not quite in the temperate category.

The fact is any skipper would have been annoyed at the kind of exposes of team matters by officials wishing to be in the spotlight. Funnily enough, the report was leaked to the media and the BCCI sought an explanation from the captain for his outburst instead of finding out how the matter came to be splashed in the media.

Considering how only three people could have had access to that report before it reached the president, it would seem a simple enough investigation could have been carried out about where the leak occurred. For, after all, who but the writer of the report, the board secretary and the executive secretary could have had a copy of the manager’s tour report?

Asking the skipper for an explanation for his outburst even as he was grappling with major issues in leading a team hit by injuries and form just ahead of the World Cup was tantamount to downright obfuscation, even if it is not to be viewed quite as a treacherous act. This was a sheer matter of a bureaucratic BCCI passing the buck.

What did a tour manager have to do with matters of selection is also a mystery. While he may have had a right to question disciplinary issues arising on tour, why was an administrative manager commenting on team selection in his report and condemning a player for his attitude when that individual may have had selection issues with the think tank? Clearly, this was something the coach and the skipper had to sort out rather than an admin man.

The BCCI may have done well to ignore the issue altogether rather than react to the leak as if a state nuclear secret had been let out of the bag. Even if to ask the skipper for an explanation in the middle of a series was a daft act, it is on the cards that the level headed skipper will reply in correct language to the charge of criticising a BCCI official at a media conference.

The BCCI has far greater issues to contend with. Its television deal, that was tom-tommed to the world as the biggest ever in world cricket, might head south now. The exclusivity, on the basis of which so much money was promised, has gone with the wind now. The Delhi HC’s latest order for Neo Sports to share its live feed simultaneously with Doordarshan means the broadcaster cannot command the market clout to get sufficient advertising at the right prices to make the deal viable.

At a time when all should have been celebrating a third Indian for passing the Himalayan mark of 10,000 ODI runs, batting in all positions from one to seven while also taking on the burden of keeping wickets, the BCCI could only think of issuing its skipper a memo. The act is not becoming of a federation that should have the best interests of its national team in its heart.

The views expressed in the article are the author's and not of Sify.com.

The column appeared in The Asian Age and Deccan Chronicle on 16th Februray, 2007