Any contest doesn't become dirty if politicians are invloved in it

It's not necessary to look at any situation in which politicians are involved as a political battle. As when a group of powerful people contest for key positions in a democratic set up, irrespective of them being politicians or not & the name one assigns to the contest, it always needs garnering support. So there's no question of who stooped more (as politics obsessed Indian media and mindset wants us to believe).

The balance of cricket economics has surely shifted towards the Asian block,owing both to numbers and cricket craziness; so whenever people contest for democratic bodies, the tilt will invariably be towards the block of the Asian cricket playing nations. This has been proved time and again.

John Howard got the pasting, as Pawar has to be the ICC president; and as a consequence John Howard can't take the subordinate's post, as someone who supported Pawar has to get the honour of filling the smaller chair.

So it's not necessary to consume the usual 'the politicians playing dirty tricks on each other' debate all the time. Media, particularly the Indian media knows what Indian psyche likes to hear and see, and that's why it incorporates the 'dirty politics angle' wherever it sees politicians involved.

So the John Howard incident is just a contest where powerful and influential got involved.We better believe it like this. Rest is just for the consumption of masses.