On Sunday, chartered accountant Amarjeet Singh surprised many when he threw his hat in the ring for the Malaysian Cricket Association (MCA) presidency.

Amarjeet pitched himself as a clean-up candidate, promising to “save MCA” and restore its reputation from the crisis over its leadership.

The candidature of the former treasurer wasn’t the only surprise when nominations closed for election of president for the 2025-2027 term.

Mohamed Iqbal Ali and Dr Arun Kumar Beshamber Nath, who were the president and deputy president respectively until about two weeks ago, joined the contest.

The stunning move left some wondering whether the returnees, who had abruptly resigned together in protest against a claimed coup, were at odds.

With vote‑splitting fears mounting, insiders hint at withdrawals of two of the men to crystallise their team’s showdown for the presidency.

As it stands, it’s a five-cornered fight, but it looks likely to change just before polling on April 27.

Former MCA president Mahinda K Vallipuram and the current vice-president Ahmad Feisal Ahmad Tajuddin are the others in the race for the No 1 post.

Mahinda is widely perceived to have orchestrated the emergency general meeting (EGM) that forced Iqbal and Arun out, and sparked the mass resignations.

About two weeks ago, Iqbal, Arun and Amarjeet resigned along with six other top officials.

Three of those who left are also back in the running for executive roles.

They are among the 37 people competing for the remaining 11 seats in the executive committee, an unprecedented swell that suggests tensions in the MCA.

This could be the most divisive election in the history of the MCA.

The ballot boom cannot be read purely as a referendum on past performance.

Equally important is the backlash against the clique that engineered the EGM to unseat a sitting president and his deputy.

What’s driving this surge for power?

Democratic vitality: A five-cornered presidential race means a broader spectrum of ideas, expertise, priorities and leadership styles on the table.

This ranges from grassroots development to commercial sponsorship, from youth pathways to national team performance.

Members get to choose among genuine alternatives rather than rubber‑stamp a single heir apparent.

Risk of fragmentation: Conversely, such a crowded field risks splintering the vote so severely that the eventual winner secures office with a small plurality.

Alliances or backroom deals may determine the outcome more than member conviction, undermining the very democratic spirit the contest purports to celebrate.

Without careful vetting, the MCA could end up with a patchwork of newcomers lacking cohesion or shared purpose.

Support for the ousted leadership: Many aspirants rallied around Iqbal and Arun, believing their sudden removal was undemocratic.

Their candidacies send a message: “We back the vision you were pursuing, and we reject the manner of your ouster.”

The backers often draw reference to MCA’s financial standing, with revenue at RM17.6 million and RM5.4 million in cash at bank, as of end December last year.

Rebuke of the EGM faction: At the same time, entries from erstwhile neutral or peripheral figures signal displeasure with the cabal that called the EGM.

By standing for election, they’re saying, “We won’t let a small group hijack governance through backroom manoeuvres.”

Fragmentation within factions: Neither the pro‑Iqbal camp nor the EGM alliance appears monolithic.

Instead of consolidating behind a single leader, we see multiple would‑be leaders emerging from each side.

This splintering reflects personal ambitions, divergent strategic priorities such as grassroots development versus commercial partnerships, and perhaps unresolved personality clashes.

Democratic engagement vs governance risk: A flood of candidates means many members feel empowered to contest and help steer MCA’s future.

It suggests an engaged membership unwilling to be sidelined by elite power plays.

“However, too many candidates on both teams could dilute the vote, and leave the new leadership with only a narrow number.

That potentially undermines its legitimacy and ability to govern decisively,” said a former cricket administrator.

How supporters will read it: Optimists will say this is exactly the kind of open contest a healthy association needs: spirited debate, clear choices, and accountability for every platform.

Pessimists will worry that factional bickering will distract from priorities just when Malaysian cricket needs stability to build international competitiveness.

Looking ahead: Healing or permanent rift?

The ultimate test won’t be the size of the candidate list but how the new leaders engage losers from both sides.

If the incoming executive builds bridges, incorporating voices who ran in protest of either camp, the turmoil could mark a turning point toward unity.

If the winners view this as a zero‑sum victory, the schism between “Team Iqbal” and “Team EGM” could calcify into enduring factionalism.

That would drain energy and goodwill when Malaysian cricket most needs cohesion.

In short, the high number of entrants is both a salute to democratic participation and a warning about deep‑seated grievances against past office‑holders and their would‑be usurpers alike.

How the MCA navigates this moment will define whether the elections become a springboard for renewal or a prelude to prolonged infighting.