Did Sachin play for India or the Indian cricket board?

Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar burst onto the international arena as a soft-spoken boy who looked younger than his 16 years. In a gentleman's game, he had to prove his mettle against menacing fast bowlers who terrorized the best.

Twenty-four years later, when he signed off, he had swept every cricket lover off his feet with his humility that seldom clouded his resolve, grit and passion for cricket. His extraordinary ability with the bat brought him and his team runs and spelt ruin for the opponents. He was revered as 'god' by a billion Indians for whom cricket has become synonymous with religion.

But did he play for the Indian national team? The billion Indians, many of whom could not stop tears rolling down their cheeks as cricket's greatest in the modern era called it a day, will answer this question with an unhesitating 'yes' in unison that would probably drown even the "Saachiin" they chanted in chorus throughout the second Test against West Indies which reached its crescendo on Saturday, the maestro's last day on a cricket field.

Did the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), the richest cricket body in the world, think Sachin played for India? The BCCI, which was praised by Sachin for standing by him during his injury forced layoffs, has consistently taken the stand that there was nothing official about the cricket team it selected as a private body.

BCCI has time and again told the Supreme Court that it was a private body registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, not amenable to rules and regulations framed by the government of India. This means, though cricket as a religion could continue to affect a billion people, the changes made by the board in the rules, player selection process, format of game, choosing of venue and utilization of the huge money collected through matches could never be questioned by the general public in a court of law.

We chose Sachin as a 'Bharat Ratna', Jewel of India, not because he excelled while playing for a private team selected by a private body for the sole purpose of enriching the coffers of BCCI, which has traditionally been managed by businessmen and politicians.

The pride and purpose with which Sachin excelled, the dizzying levels he rose to and the flamboyance with which he met the challenges in foreign countries would not have been possible had he not felt the intoxicating surge of adrenaline pumped by patriotism that wells up inside a player when he dons the national team's colours.

The irresistible urge to bring smile and succour to a billion fans, whose lips let out prayers every time he batted, would have somewhat lost its course had he not been playing for India.

What did Sachin think? "I just feel that all of us are so, so fortunate and proud to be part of the Indian cricket team and serving the nation," he said. No, he did not think that he was playing for a private team selected by BCCI.

So why did BCCI talk of the team it selects as a private team? Is it to escape the rigour of scrutiny?

In the 2005 Zee Telefilms judgment, the Supreme Court had noted the BCCI's stand -- "It is a private organization whose objects are to promote the game of cricket. Its functions are regulated and governed by its own rules and regulations independent of any statute and are only related to its members."

The court was reluctant to allow government intervention in the affairs of cricket. A five-judge constitution bench by a 3:2 margin ruled that it would not be proper to classify BCCI as "state" and make it amenable to writ jurisdiction of the constitutional courts, though it allowed a small window by allowing persons aggrieved by BCCI's actions to move high courts.

In February this year, the Competition Commission of India noted that the gross turnover of BCCI for 2007-08 was Rs 1,000.41 crore, for 2008-09 Rs 745.83 crore and for 2009-10 Rs 886.11 crore.

The CCI said, "BCCI's economic power is enormous as a regulator that enables it to pick winners. BCCI has gained tremendously from IPL format of the cricket in financial terms. Virtually, there is no other competitor in the market nor was anyone allowed to emerge due to BCCI's strategy of monopolizing the entire market."

For every match it organizes, it collects money from the public and advertisements from sponsors as well as other companies. It has a monopoly over the game of cricket in India. It owes its riches to the public participation in its events. Should it still be permitted to function like a private body? Should it not be brought under the ambit of Right to Information Act? Should the general public not know about its functioning?