Neither the supporters of priority for the Sahara Cup nor the campaigners for the Commonwealth tourney can claim to carry full conviction with the public. IOA president Suresh Kalmadi should have struck a chord with his summing up that it is "coin versus medal" or between the pelf-promising Toronto trophy and the Kuala Lumpur event. Especially in view of the mercenary image of our cricketers as a whole and the common perception that the administrators of the game concentrate unduly on its commercial aspects.

All the more for the abysmal popularity ratings of the board and its leading lights, who have been busy playing their petty power games of little relevance to the realissues and interests of Indian cricket. Kalmadi's case for sending the national side to Canada and the second-best squad to Malaysia is unlikely to find widespread endorsement. It is not because of the money factor that many may favour the precisely opposite course.

To them, the Sahara Cup is more important than the Commonwealth trophy to the extent that popular involvement is a more important feature of a sport event than protocol. Indo-Pakistan contests are indeed the subcontinental equivalent of the Ashes: likely, the sides may play better cricket elsewhere, but none of it can truly be the same for the supporters of the traditional rivals. Toronto has provided an answer to their prayers for Indo-Pak cricket in a venue where it won't be politically vitiated.

A second-string team for Kuala Lumpur may seem just the right response to the level of others' participation. England, in an eloquent irony, is staying away from the Commonwealth event, while Pakistan will be represented by a make-do team, withSouth Africa resting its best players including skipper Hansie Cronje and the West Indies refraining from sending a unified squad.

Besides, why can't the exigency caused by the clash of the tournaments' dates be seen as an opportunity to field new players and expose them to international cricket? Can't we make their participation in the event part of our preparation for the World Cup, still months away?

The controversy can also be seen as part of the problem of cricket coexisting with other sporting disciplines, particularly under an umbrella that allows it no special place. Illustrative of this are the differences on dope-testing, with the Indian board determined to protect its players from such an indignity. The question will arise in the event of renewed attempts to include cricket in the Olympics repertoire.

True, no drug-testing has been done so far in the "gentlemen's game" (which it has not remained) and "the game played in the mind" (in which fitness has become increasingly important). Othersports, however, may not agree to the perpetuation of a possibly outdated privilege. The benefit of the doubt may eventually go to the board on Toronto and the testing but, in the commentator's language, it will be lucky to get away.