Let's see -- the latest sting operation "uncovered" the following:

#: Greg Chappell was at outs with Sourav Ganguly and Sachin Tendulkar. That is new, from a coach who at the outset of his tenure suggested to members of the media that there were a few "cancers" within the squad, that needed to be surgically eradicated if the team was to function as a team?

#: Tendulkar and Ganguly were both vying for the captaincy, and their route to that ambition was to give the designated captain, Rahul Dravid, less than the fullest cooperation due to him. Simultaneously, they had created their own camps among the younger players -- who, while backing their respective candidates, were similarly at outs with Dravid.

#: Yuvraj Singh was a law unto himself.

#: Sponsors were fiddling around with team selection, in a bid to ensure that "their men" played.

#: The seniors couldn't stand Chappell, because among other things, he was too "big" a player for them to boss around.

That is a summation of the "startling" revelations -- so what exactly is new, or startling, about any of it?

Actually, there is one eye-opening aspect to the whole sting operation: the selectors, all of them, knew.

Yet, if you throw your mind back to the various stories that were flying around in the days before the team to Bangladesh was chosen, the refrain was: How can we drop the seniors? What cricketing ground is there to drop them?

Also recall the official statements being made by the BCCI: Everything was A-okay in the team, there was no dissent, no factionalism, it was all one happy family and no, sponsor pressure was not an issue, we lost in the World Cup because of the format of the tournament.

While all that pap was being fed to consumers, the BCCI knew what was going on, the selectors knew what was going on -- and clearly, there was no attempt to do anything concrete about it. Greg Chappell was offered the NCA. Dravid, who apparently had no control over the team -- seniors and juniors alike -- is still the captain. Rebels in chief Sachin and Sourav were "rested" for three ODI games, with the selectors going to great pains to point out that there was no question of their being disciplined -- they were being rested because there is a great deal of ODI cricket to play still.

In other words, dissent was okay with the board and the selectors; factionalism was okay with the board and the selectors; everything the players did -- all of which clearly undermined the team's prospects in the World Cup -- was okay with the board and the selectors; none of it is deemed worthy of salutary punishment.

So then, why precisely must the rest of us get excited about these "new revelations" that are neither new nor revelatory, since all of it is okay with those who run cricket in this country?