BCCI

Gautam Gambhir and Manoj Tiwary slug it out via the media (Updated)

Gautam Gambhir at Adelaide Oval (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

When two former India players almost come to blows on the cricket field with the choicest words exchanged, it makes for headline news.

When the two in question, Gautam Gambhir and Manoj Tiwary, have an acrimonious history, it makes for even greater sensationalism.

Tiwary was dropped by his erstwhile Kolkata Knight Riders colleague and skipper during the 2013 IPL wherein he immediately tweeted that it was the worst day of his life. The offending tweet was later deleted with the current Bengal captain claiming that his account had been hacked.

Tiwary now turns out for Delhi Daredevils.

Manoj Tiwary at Adelaide Oval (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Last Saturday, the two were once more involved in a public fracas during a Ranji trophy game between Delhi and Bengal at the Feroz Shah Kotla ground.

The incident occurred in the eighth over when Tiwary signaled for his helmet.

The Delhi players were incensed believing it to be a time-wasting tactic.

Manan Sharma, the bowler at the time, had something to say to the Bengal skipper.

Gambhir entered the fray abusing Tiwary who retaliated in kind.

That was when Gambhir calling upon his best Hindi film dialogues said:

“Shaam ko mil tujhe maroonga (Meet me in the evening, I will hit you).”

Tiwary, evidently another Hindi film buff, responded:

“Shaam kya abhi bahar chal (Why wait till evening, let’s go out and settle it now).”

Tempers were raised further with Gambhir charging towards the batsman with umpire Krishnaraj Srinath intervening only to be pushed away by the pugnacious left-hander.

The players were later summoned by match referee Valmik Buch.

Tiwary said:

“I have huge respect for Gambhir for whatever he has done for the country. But today, he crossed all limits by making some personal comments. I was really shocked to hear that. I did not start it at all.”

Gambhir, too,  issued a statement:

“At no point did I threaten or push any on-field umpires. Nor did I threaten to beat Manoj up. In fact, I attended match referee’s hearing post the day’s play where he accepted that he doesn’t have any video evidence of me pushing the umpire. On the contrary, the match referee conceded he had video evidence where Manoj is seen pushing Pradeep Sangwan.”

Buch fined Gambhir 70% of his match fee and Tiwary, 40%.

Tiwari added:

“Obviously they were pressurising me but that does not mean he has the right to abuse me. What I said, sledging in a competitive way is good but you don’t have to sledge taking your father or mother’s name. You don’t want to cross line when you play competitive game.

I spoke to him [Ganguly] and told him about the whole incident. He was very upset because, somewhere his name was also raised.”

Tiwary also took to Twitter—obviously— to proclaim his side of the story.

The Bengal skipper has since upped the ante claiming that Gambhir made racist (read parochial) remarks against Sourav Ganguly and Bengalis, in particular.

He said:

“He made racist remarks about Sourav Ganguly and Bengalis. I spoke to Sourav Ganguly and he is very upset that his name has been dragged in the matter. We will never accept anything against Sourav Ganguly.”

He added:

“Gautam Gambhir is not saying the truth. If I had done what Gambhir is saying why have I been fined 40 percent and him 70 percent.”

Gambhir may be facing a ban because he shoved aside the umpire Srinath. Cricket is a non-contact sport and simply touching an umpire physically invites censure.

The Delhi skipper released another statement defending himself from Tiwary’s latest allegations.

He wrote:

“On Sunday, Manoj Tiwary stooped to a new low by claiming that I made racist remarks about Bengali community and my favourite India captain and one of the best cricketers I have played under Mr Sourav Ganguly whom I fondly call Dada. Let me categorically state here that these allegations are baseless and Tiwary’s way of sensationalising things through his figment of imagination.

First of all I am a proud Indian who respects all religions, communities and sexes. Then, ever since I have had the honour of leading Kolkata Knight Riders in IPL I have been humbled by the love and affection showered on my team and me by Bengali community. I have said in numerous interviews that Bengal is my second home and the support of the fans is the biggest X factor for KKR. I can’t thank them enough for helping us win IPL title twice.”

On Ganguly:

“Dada taught Indian cricket to play aggressive brand of cricket and modelled the team to win outside India. His contribution to Indian cricket is unparalleled. Personally, I made my India debut under Dada’s leadership and can never forget the way he eased me into the team dressing room. Besides, I have picked up a lot of things from Dada’s leadership ways and put them in practise for KKR. It is unfortunate that Dada’s name was dragged in by Tiwary perhaps to gain cheap publicity.”

The media is always seeking sound bytes aside from the mandatory tweeted reactions from fans and websites.

Gautam Gambhir – manoj tiwari meme #gautamgambhir #pjpatakha https://t.co/bmNyHartms—
Hindi Joke Express (@pjpatakha) October 24, 2015

Bishan Singh Bedi promptly obliged.

The inimitable Sardar said:

“This is a direct result of the IPL because of the competitive nature that tournament lends itself to for these so-called professionals.

I feel sick. I watched the TV report and this is absolutely shameful. There’s too much of this ‘giving it back’ attitude. All this while it was about giving it back to foreign teams. Now, this syndrome is creeping into the Indian scene. Give back something sane, not insane. And give back something good to the game that has made you professionals.”

He added:

“Look, fines are like loose change for these cricketers. You’ve got to ban them for a few games and hit them where it hurts. The ball is entirely in BCCI’s court.
They need to take to drastic steps to ensure such incidents are not repeated. This is awful for the game of cricket. Erring players must be put on the mat. They call themselves professionals. Does professionalism entail such behaviour? We have been too lenient with our big names. This is not the first time Gambhir is involved in controversy like this.”

There may be a bright side to this whole skirmish.

Just when interest in the domestic game is dying out, the passion exhibited by these senior cricketers simply proves the competitiveness of their nature and the intensity of rivalry at the state level.

There is hope yet and fears of spot or match fixing may be ungrounded in these games. (We hope).

That, of course, is not the point readers and young cricketers wish to take away from the sorry episode.

Shyama Dasgupta, in the Economic Times, writes:

“Firstly, about the attitude of the star players–internationals-towards the other players. A `big’ player will usually play domestic fixtures either because there are no assignments or because he has been dropped. It’s one thing for someone who has played just a game or two for India, but for someone to have played at the highest level with some distinction, the step down is a tough one.

They often expect, and get, star treatment from their state associations and from everyone else. It can get quite feudal, says a former cricketer. Another, also a commentator, uses the word aukaat. Worth. To mean that the stars don’t think of players junior to them as being worthy of being peers. Except, that is exactly what they are: members of the same team, playing at the same level.

Then, about the attitude of star players towards umpires and vice versa. Unsurprisingly, there are a lot of stories of bullying and of being bullied.

A senior colleague had once told me about a veteran international umpire who gave tailenders in the domestic circuit out if there was even a whiff of an appeal-what, you are going to score 100 runs or what, he is known to have told an upstart of a No 11 when there was a protest. It’s fair to assume this No 11 wasn’t an international or a former international. Sure, there are umpires who don’t back down in the face of bullying, but there are likely as many who can’t.

These things, the cricketers I spoke to agreed, just haven’t changed. Two of them–former internationals–admitted to having done the same thing in their playing days as well.”

Cricket is termed a gentleman’s game but the only true gentlemen on the field are probably the umpires.

Zaheer Khan and Virender Sehwag, brothers-in-arms in retirement

Virender Sehwag fielding at Adelaide Oval (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Two giants of Indian cricket quit the game within a week of each other.

One accumulated over 300 Test wickets, only the second Indian fast bowler to do so.

The other is the only Indian to have scored a triple ton in Tests, not once but twice and it could easily have been one more.

One was a canny operator outfoxing the best of the opposition with his wily wares.

The other kept it simple. The ball was meant to be hit when it was in the hitting zone.

Both are 37 years young and can still pad up for a fresh innings in the journey of life.

One has retired from international cricket but will continue to appear in the IPL.

The other has retired from international cricket and the IPL but may make an appearance at Sachin Tendulkar’s T20 All Star League in the US. He celebrated his departure by slamming a century against Karnataka for Haryana in a Ranji trophy game.

One was instrumental in India reaching the final at the 2003 World Cup in South Africa and clinching the title in 2011 at home.

The other was a member of both the 2007 T20 World Cup and 2011 ICC ODI World Cup winning squads.

Zaheer Khan gives a Somerset batsman a wry smile while bowling during the first match of India’s 2011 tour of England, played at the County Ground, Taunton (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

They are both modest and soft-spoken to the point of being self-effacing.

One is still single and obviously a catch for any young woman.

The other is married to Aarti Ahlawat and has two sons Aryavir and Vedant.

One promised—in his retirement statement—to return with the headline ‘Zak is back’.

The other quoted Mark Twain claiming that stories of his retirement were greatly exaggerated.

Indian cricket will surely miss them.

Zaheer Khan and Virender Sehwag, farewell, adios, sayonara.

Vandana Jain complains, withdraws case against Amit Mishra and then doesn’t (Updated)

Amit Mishra in the field during India’s first match of their 2011 tour of England at the County Ground, Taunton (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The best leg-spinner in the country, Amit Mishra, is embroiled in a sordid scandal.

A woman friend has filed and withdrawn a police complaint against the cricketer for allegedly assaulting her in his hotel room during the preparatory camp in Bengaluru last month.

Mishra had been summoned by the local authorities.

The leggie was originally booked under sections 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) and 328 (causing hurt with intent to commit an offence) of the Indian Penal Code.

The complainant is 34-year old Bengaluru resident Vandana Jain.  She is a Bollywood producer and co-owner of Celebrity Cricket League’s Bengal Tigers team along with Boney Kapoor.

Jain accused Mishra of attacking her with a kettle and behaving immodestly with her.

Mishra and Jain were good friends over the past three years. The diminutive sportsman was  a frequent visitor at her residence on Rest House, Crescent Road.

The lady confronted Mishra for avoiding her by inveigling herself into his hotel room without his permission.

According  to the Bangalore Mirror, Jain’s written complaint at the Ashok Nagar station states:

“I learnt that he is in town for training prior to South Africa tour. On September 25 evening, I went to Ritz Carlton hotel room and began to talk to him. He began to give me evasive replies and shouted at me. He tried to outrage my modesty. Even few hotel staff have seen this and CCTV footage must confirm this. Please take action against him for assaulting me.

Once he entered the room, he started fighting and asked me how I got into the room without his permission. He started hitting me with his hands and threw a kettle at my face. He started choking me hard and I suffocated. I screamed. I was frightened as I almost stopped breathing. He twisted my right wrist and fractured my right ring finger.”

A copy of the complaint was made available to the BCCI.

A senior police office said:

“We have sent a notice to him (Amit Mishra) and are waiting for his reply. Also, we have asked him to appear before the jurisdictional police at the earliest and also to co-operate with them in the investigation process.

We are collecting the information from the staff at the hotel on Residency Road, where the incident took place. It seems like the victim is known to Mishra and has visited him a couple of times. To get an exact picture we will question Mishra and the victim and then carry on with the case.”

Another police officer added:

“She told the staff in the reception lobby that Mishra was expecting her. Once upstairs, she told the housekeeping staff that she had lost her key and needed to use the washroom urgently. She looked confident and her posh dressing and mannerisms convinced the housekeeping staff.

There’s no doubt that the two knew each other very well. The woman has told us that they were in a relationship. She was forced to take the step of sneaking into his room as he was trying to avoid her. These things are common among couples and her entering the room cannot be construed as trespassing in the strict sense.

She was a familiar presence in the hotel. So the version of the hotel staff also can’t be taken on face value.”

Mishra is an integral part of Team India’s scheme of things for the on-going series against South Africa at home.

The trundler is considered unfortunate to have played just 15 Tests for the country since his debut in 2008.

In a turn of events, Vandana Jain has decided to withdraw her case.

Speaking to PTI, she said:

“Two days after lodging the complaint, I approached the police station and told them that I have in principle decided to withdraw the case,” the complainant told PTI here. I am waiting for Mishra to appear in the police station. We both will amicably withdraw the case. We were friends. We fought, and continue to remain friends here after.”

Jain insists that she has not been pressurized in any way.

She added:

“There was no pressure from any quarters, including the BCCI. I am surprised how the media picked up the case, which I have decided to withdraw.”

Update:

Jain has since recanted saying that she will not withdraw her complaint against Mishra.

Speaking to the Hindu, she said:

“I won’t withdraw the complaint against Amit (Mishra). I am hurt physically, mentally and emotionally by the cricketer. He knew I was going to the police and kept saying he will come to Bengaluru and sort out the matter. I want Amit to come in front of the police and talk to me.”

She added:

“My hand was in a cast, which I removed recently. I was forced to go to the police following the abuse and insult Amit subjected me to.”

Jain trusts that the law will take its course.

“Court and police will decide. I trust police, I trust law, so let them decide. I thought of withdrawing the case but then I realized if he is not worried about it then why I should. Let him take his step, let me take my step. I didn’t want to ruin his life, I don’t want to ruin his career but the things went wrong without my intentions.”

Second update:

Mishra was arrested on the 27th of October in the morning and then released on bail by the Ashok Nagar police.

The ace legspinner spent three hours at the Cubbon Park police station.

Sandeep Patil, DCP Central said:

“Enquiry with regard to the assault complaint was done. Mishra was questioned for 3 hours from 11am following which he was arrested and released on bail as it is a bailable offence.”

The Twitteratti reacted swiftly to the latest debacle.

Here are some choice tweets:

https://twitter.com/lindsaypereira/status/658936373131407360

Indo-Pak cricketing ties derailed by opportunistic politics and unrealistic expectations

It’s a crying shame, really.

Shahryar Khan, former Pakistan Foreign secretary. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Shashank Manohar may have begun ‘Operation Clean-Up’ on the right foot but the even-handed BCCI President couldn’t prevent Shiv Sena activists from barging into his headquarters in Mumbai and disrupting the scheduled bilateral series talks with Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) counterpart Shahryar Khan.

Boria Majumdar puts it aptly in his column:

“In India we celebrate cultural tolerance and plurality, we are forever ready to uphold freedom of expression and speech and most importantly are always open to dialogue. What happened in Mumbai goes against the very grain of what we stand for and that’s what has left us all with a sour aftertaste. Had Shashank Manohar been able to tell Shahryar Khan that the series is off because the situation is not conducive or the government has not given bilateral cricket a go ahead, it would have been far better for both cricket Boards. But to see a meeting stymied by a few political extremists who barged into the office of the BCCI president, which was left unguarded and to see these pictures being transmitted round the world is rather disconcerting.”

Shiv Sena (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The shame is not that a bilateral series between the two countries has once again been pushed onto the back-burner.

To be realistic, if the two boards were really intent on continuing relations, they could have easily opted to play in Abu Dhabi (as other cricketing nations have been doing) thus avoiding security concerns and untoward elements in either country.

That is not the nub of the issue.

If you were to read the newspapers and media reactions to Pakistani writers, cricketers and artistes, you would believe that anti-Pakistan sentiments are at an all-time high.

Is that really so?

Isn’t it more likely that certain opportunistic parties have raised the bogeyman once more to gain political mileage and divert attention of the general public from more pressing concerns about governance or rather the lack of it?

The more closely you look at the matter, the more apparent it becomes that having any sort of ties with the ‘enemy’ across the North-West border is a political decision. The mandarins in New Delhi have the final say.

Perhaps, realpolitik dictates otherwise.

For actual progress to occur, a nod must begin from the Prime Minister’s office and then only can the nation rest assured that change is in the air.

A bottom-up push is not the way to build bridges across a diplomatic divide.

That would be a revolution.

Shashank Manohar presides over cleaning up of BCCI’s IPL

Embed from Getty Images
Newly elected BCCI President Shashank Manohar hit his straps and struck the right notes at its Working Committee meeting last Sunday.

The decisions that the general public evinced most interest in were the ones pertaining to who would replace Pepsi as the title sponsor, whether the Chennai Super Kings and Rajasthan Royal franchises would be terminated or suspended and what would be the particulars of the newly framed conflict of interest rules within the cricketing body.

The Board did not disappoint.

Pepsi logo (1970-1991) In 1987, the font was modified slightly to a more rounded version which was used until 1991. This logo is now used for Pepsi Throwback (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Pepsi are expectedly out.

Surprise, surprise, it’s not Paytm replacing them but Vivo mobiles. That’s pulling a rabbit out of a hat.

Fair enough, given that Vivo agreed to the deal at the same price that Pepsi signed on.

Paytm would have been hard-pressed to match that.

The BCCI, after all its fulminations and discussions with the franchises’ owners, submitted to Justice Lodha committee’s dictates suspending the CSK and RR franchises for two years. The show must go on though—with eight teams.

Tenders will be floated and bids invited for two fresh franchises—once more making it a 10 team league in 2018.

Good enough.

It is the proposed conflict of interest rules that have raised a hue and cry within the BCCI and the state associations.

Shashank Manohar has taken a leaf out of his judicial textbook and drafted a stringent set of stipulations for administrators, selectors, commentators and players.

You could swear you heard a collective groan within the cosy cricketing fraternity.

To the highest bidder goes the spoils.

And you can rest assured that ex-cricketers will be scrambling to join the IPL band-wagon where the highest paymasters reside.

The guidelines will be tabled at the Annual General Meeting on Monday, 9th November 2015 at the BCCI Headquarters in Mumbai.

Manohar certainly means business when it comes to cleaning up the IPL mess.

No further comment.

Sourav Ganguly succeeds Jagmohan Dalmiya: The King is dead, long live the King!

The King is dead, long live the King!

It is, perhaps, fitting that Sourav Ganguly, Jagmohan Dalmiya’s erstwhile blue-eyed boy, succeeds him as president of the Cricket Association of Bengal (CAB).

The deal was sealed when the chief minister, Mamata Banerjee, threw her weight behind Ganguly’s candidature on Wednesday.

Ganguly was only recently elected to the CAB serving as a joint-secretary.

With Didi playing kingmaker, Dada has been fast-forwarded to the corridors of power within the BCCI.

Ganguly had always enjoyed a special relationship with ‘Jaggu’—as Dalmiya was fondly known.

Sourav Ganguly at the opening of the mascot of Knight Riders (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The southpaw ‘Maharajah’ was recalled to the Indian side in 1996 allegedly at Dalmiya’s behest.

It is also believed that Ganguly managed to hold on to his post as skipper through all the early turmoil because he enjoyed his benefactor’s support much as N Srinivasan is believed to be MS Dhoni’s champion.

It was also during Ganguly’s tenure as skipper that the BCCI under Dalmiya introduced centralised annual contracts for Indian cricketers.

Ganguly’s exit as skipper coincided with Dalmiya’s departure from the echelons of power.

The elegant former all-rounder is 43—still a relatively young man for the job.

It was six years ago that the former India skipper made known his ambitions of becoming the BCCI chief by 2014.

Speaking to Times of India then, the left-hander said:

“I am convinced that I can play a positive role. Having played the game at the highest level and being part of the system, I know what it takes to make a difference. At some point, I will find a way to get into the CAB where people have known me since I was a kid. I have respect for them and I am sure they will appreciate my concern for Bengal cricket and the difference I can make. I am in no hurry.”

It’s been six years but Ganguly has already taken a giant leap towards fulfilling his new dream.

It’s not that Ganguly is a total novice at this game of musical chairs.

His father, Chandidas, was a member of the CAB serving as assistant secretary, treasurer, secretary, vice-president and member of trustee board.

In turn, Ganguly has a chance to play kingmaker at the BCCI elections when they meet to elect the new president. It will be interesting to see how he plays his cards.

Ganguly is loyal to a fault. Dalmiya’s scion Avishek replaces his deceased father in the CAB as the joint secretary.

Trinamool Congress chief Mamata Banerjee attends a news conference in the eastern Indian city of Kolkata September 7, 2008. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Mamata Banerjee denied that it is at her interference that Bengal’s favourite son ascended to the throne.

She said:

“We are going through a big crisis after his (Dalmiya) unfortunate death. Someone has to head CAB. Dalmiya loved cricket so much. So it’s important that the people closed to him (should run the show)… cricket family is most important. My only request to all of you that be together, remain united and take the Jaguda’s legacy forward. It’s not fair for me to interfere. I just want them to do well, I’m there with them like a deputy or colleague. It’s what they have decided together.I should not be announcing this but since all of them are requesting I feel that as someone (Sourav Ganguly) who had led India so many years should now take charge of the role and they should form the set up with Abhishek, Subir, Biswarup and all other senior members.”

She added:

“Please don’t involve the state government here. I am nobody. It’s what they decided. Please don’t bring any controversy here. It’s their decision as they all are cricket lovers. After Jaguda’s death, CAB is without a head now and they have decided that Sourav will become the president and in his place Avishek will become the joint secretary till the next elections in July.”

Ganguly said:

“Anything in life is a new challenge. I am particularly happy that Avishek is coming into administration as it is a very emotional time for him. Myself, Biswarup, Subir would all work together and there won’t be any problems. We have 117 (actually 121) members and we will decide the way forward. Like she said, it is not her decision. She had spoken to the members. For me this is not everything. I will do whatever I can, whatever they want me to do. Will take over immediately as we have a game on October 8. These are big shoes to fill.”

Former India cricketer and Ganguly’s teammate VVS Laxman welcomed his elevation to the post.

He said:

“It’s Sourav who brought me here and I’m seeing him as an administrator for last one year. He’s trying his best to take Bengal cricket forward. It’s a great selection and a positive sign for the Indian cricket.”

Laxman is the batting consultant with the state’s Ranji side.

Ajay Jadeja was more circumspect in his reaction.

He said:

“Ganguly has been a good leader but administration is a different ball game. At the same time, being a former cricketer, it is beneficial for him. Have faith in him. Wait and watch. It is his new innings and I wish him the best.”

Ganguly, however, will not have everything going his way.

He has already ruffled feathers within the CAB by seeking the chief minster’s blessings sidestepping the democratic process. The Prince of Calcutta was probably well aware that he might not be able to command the majority required.

Derek Abraham, writing for the DNA, commented:

“Two years ago, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) had accused the Union sports ministry of trying to ‘assume control’ of sports federations by bringing in the National Sports Code. Soon Ajay Maken, the sports minister, was shunted out by all those politicians controlling various federations, including the BCCI.

However, when Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee threw her weight behind former India captain Sourav Ganguly on Wednesday, virtually anointing him president of the Cricket Association of Bengal, none of the so-called custodians of the BCCI’s autonomy came forward to slam the move.”

He adds:

“The CAB is an institution dating back to 1928. Ganguly has, quite shockingly, made a mockery of the institutional process that ought to have been followed. By using his good offices with the most powerful person in the state, India’s second-most successful skipper has subjected himself to scrutiny both within and outside the cricket fraternity.

A joint secretary serving his first term, Ganguly has bypassed many veteran administrators who have been serving the association for decades. Worse, he got Avishek Dalmiya, the deceased president’s son, to become the joint secretary. For the record, Avishek never been a part of a sub-committee of the CAB. If Ganguly is a novice in cricket administration, then Avishek is a fledgling.

To quote a CAB insider, the ‘new president’ has done exactly what his predecessor never wanted — play into the hands of the government of the day. ‘He has disappointed us all by sidestepping the democratic process of the CAB. But there is nothing we can do because he has Madam’s support.’”

Boria Majumdar, blogging for the Economic Times, raises similar points in his post.

He is , however, optimistic that Ganguly may just be the ‘breath of fresh air’ the Board needs.

He writes:

“The BCCI needs men of credibility and integrity after what it has gone through the last few years. Ganguly should come as a breath of fresh air for the board’s mandarins. He is a face they can thrust forward as a diplomatic shield in many uncomfortable situations. His presence in the board’s special general meetings (SGMs) and annual general meetings (AGMs) should result in him making tangible contributions to improving Indian cricket both at home and abroad.

Can we add another feather to the many that he already wears? With Sourav Ganguly you just can’t tell.”

While the political patronage sought by Ganguly is to be deplored, why do members of the BCCI (and other sports bodies) not take issue when politicians such as Sharad Pawar and Arun Jaitley make the BCCI an extension of their political masters’ rivalry? We also have to ask ourselves that if it had not been Ganguly but some businessperson who sought the Trinamool Congress’ leader’s support, would there have been such a hue-and-cry? If the answer’s no, then why the hypocrisy?

It’s time that the national sports federations revisited the provisions of the Draft National Sports Development bill which they rejected and added clauses that would bolster their independence. Till then, the kind of politicking and ad-hoc decision-making process typical of Indian sports bodies will continue to be a feature of the national landscape.

Sanju Samson is allegedly the Abominable Salivator

Sanju Samson has allegedly behaved badly.

The India ‘A’ keeper has been accused of salivating spitefully at his Australian opponents’ feet.

The incident occurred in the tri-series final between the home side and the visitors.

India ‘A’ clinched the title, registering their first victory in the series against their counterparts from Down Under.

The Kerala player claimed a catch that the Australians felt was illegal.

This led to an exchange of words when the 20-year-old came out to bat.

Usman Khawaja, the Aussie skipper, said:

“Obviously the guys in our team were disappointed that he claimed he had taken the catch.

Today he spit in front of our player’s foot three times. If you do that the boys are going to get worked up and the umpires were not understanding it. We did try to calm the boys, but they just went on and on.

I am happy if the batsman happens to talk back but spitting is not on. He spit on one of our players when he came onto the field.

If one of our players said something to him, he can say something back but not spitting.”

Khawaja added:

“I do not want to make a big deal about things that happened on the field. I do not want to take away any credit from India. They really played well today and were the better team to have won.

Unfortunately, incidents like that happen. Some incident happened the other day with one of your bowler (Sandeep Sharma). He was coming back and it was fine. I was happy with that. I have seen it all, it is another game, it does not affect me too much.

It is always tough to defend a total of 220 runs. We had our chance when the fifth wicket fell but we have to take wickets to win the game. India just batted sensibly. The wicket was up and down and it was not turning massive. If we had few more runs we could strangle them on that kind of wicket.”

The match umpires and other officials should be filing their report with the BCCI.

An investigation into this kind of unwarranted behaviour and its antecedents should be launched to prevent any such recurrence.

Players behaving badly—spittle-less or not—can only lead to more bad blood in the future and should be nipped in the bud.

It is a gentleman’s game after all.

IPL spot-fixing scandal: Sreesanth, Chandila and Chavan go scot-free, not quite…

With S Sreesanth, Ajit Chandila and Ankeet Chavan absolved of any  criminal complicity in the IPL spot-fixing and betting scandal and the BCCI drawing a line in the sand claiming that their ban on the aforesaid individuals will not be revoked, Indian cricket fans are in for more courtroom drama involving the BCCI and the freed trio.

Sreesanth at Adelaide Oval (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Delhi court order leaves the field open for the three players to challenge the nation’s premier cricket body and overturn the ban. This may be a long drawn-out process. There is no guarantee that if and when the ban is nullified, the players will be at their best. They have lost their prime years while serving the ban.

Mohammad Azharuddin, Nayan Mongia and Ajay Jadeja cleared  their names by taking on the BCCI via the Indian judicial system. Yet, only Jadeja was able to make a comeback of sorts to competitive cricket.

What must perplex every cricket aficionado is how and why one tribunal found the IPL players guilty and the other did not. The evidence presented in both cases was the same. Strange are the ways of the Indian judicial system and the BCCI.

The BCCI responded to the Delhi High Court’s verdict thus:

“Any disciplinary proceeding or decision taken by the BCCI is independent of any criminal proceeding and has no bearing. The decisions of the BCCI, based on its independent disciplinary action, shall remain unaltered.The BCCI has nothing to do with acriminal case between the police and individuals. The disciplinary proceedings of the board and the criminal case of the police are independent of each other. In certain cases a charge is enough in a departmental inquiry while the same charge is needed to be proved in a court of law.”

PR Raman, a former legal officer with the cricketing body, said:

“The standard of proof in a court is different from standard of proof in a BCCI inquiry. Acquittal in a court cannot have any influence on the BCCI action which was taken independent of court rules.The degree of strictness is different from a court and a domestic/departmental inquiry. The laws in courts are not similar to those in the BCCI. The BCCI goes by its own code of conduct.Savani had found out that they were hobnobbing with bookies. That is enough to prove the players guilty. Talking to bookies is unacceptable under the BCCI code.”

Mohammad Amir pulling on his jumper in the outfield. Taken during Pakistan’s third Test against England in August 2010. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Mohammad Amir, Mohammad Asif and Salman Butt were handed five, seven and ten years bans by an ICC tribunal. The criminal case that followed wherein the ICC verdict was not made available to the English press to prevent biasing any jury found the above guilty of conspiracy to cheat at gambling and accepting corrupt payments. Butt and Asif were sentenced to 30 and 12 months in prison respectively while Amir was sentenced to six months in Feltham Young Offenders Institution.

The teen-aged fast bowler was freed after serving only half his sentence.

The ICC tribunal and the Southwark Crown Court were one in accord.

The discordant note struck yesterday  will have warning bells going off within the BCCI once more.

Mohammad Azharuddin Sangeeta Bijlani (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

BCCI fires off conflict of interest missive to members

When the BCCI stated that it would accept the Lodha Committee’s recommendations in toto, few believed it would make any substantial difference to its inner workings and the postponement of any decision about the suspended teams CSK and RR only fueled these suspicions.

The first inkling of sweeping changes in the offing occurred yesterday when the BCCI addressed the issue of conflict of interest in a letter to its members requested them to sign a declaration stating that they have no existing conflicts of interest in their capacities as officials with the BCCI or any state association.

The letter states:

“Conflict of interest is not about beliefs or biases. It is about a person’s roles and responsibilities, and the tendency or apprehension of bias that assumes to exist when duties, decisions or actions conflict. Deciding that someone has a conflict of interest is a description of a situation, not a judgement about the person or their actual beliefs.”

It also asks members to declare the absence of “any personal or family allegiance, bias, inclination, obligation or any interest of whatsoever nature, directly or indirectly which may in any way affect or provide any financial or any other benefit to me, my family or close relations or which may tend to interfere with or affect my objectivity, independence, impartiality and neutrality in any decision making process, acts and conduct relating to or arising out of discharge of my office of President/Hony. Secretary of …”

It is a pity really that the antics of politicians and certain ‘luminaries’ within the BCCI and other national sports federations have tarred all who have been accused of conflicts of interest with the same brush.

The paucity of qualified people especially ex-sportspersons willing to be a part of sports administration is well known and there is always a possibility that there will be some entanglement of private and public roles and responsibilities.

That’s as it is. It should not be sufficient reason to jettison recent developments as non-viable or unworkable in an Indian context. This has been the bane of any attempt at reforms.

Let us revisit the definition of ‘conflict of interest‘ first.

Wikipedia states:

“A conflict of interest (COI) is a situation in which a person or organization is involved in multiple interests (financial, emotional, or otherwise), one of which could possibly corrupt the motivation of the individual or organization.

The presence of a conflict of interest is independent of the occurrence of impropriety. Therefore, a conflict of interest can be discovered and voluntarily defused before any corruption occurs. A widely used definition is: “A conflict of interest is a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgement or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest.” Primary interest refers to the principal goals of the profession or activity, such as the protection of clients, the health of patients, the integrity of research, and the duties of public office. Secondary interest includes not only financial gain but also such motives as the desire for professional advancement and the wish to do favours for family and friends, but conflict of interest rules usually focus on financial relationships because they are relatively more objective, fungible, and quantifiable. The secondary interests are not treated as wrong in themselves, but become objectionable when they are believed to have greater weight than the primary interests. The conflict in a conflict of interest exists whether or not a particular individual is actually influenced by the secondary interest. It exists if the circumstances are reasonably believed (on the basis of past experience and objective evidence) to create a risk that decisions may be unduly influenced by secondary interests.”

Conflict of interest is best understood in the judicial context. It’s probably no surprise that Shashank Manohar, a lawyer by profession, was and is one of former BCCI supremo N Srinivasan’s staunchest critics.

“Judicial disqualification, also referred to as recusal, refers to the act of abstaining from participation in an official action such as a court case/legal proceeding due to a conflict of interest of the presiding court official or administrative officer. Applicable statutes or canons of ethics may provide standards for recusal in a given proceeding or matter. Providing that the judge or presiding officer must be free from disabling conflicts of interest makes the fairness of the proceedings less likely to be questioned.

In the legal profession, the duty of loyalty owed to a client prohibits an attorney (or a law firm) from representing any other party with interests adverse to those of a current client. The few exceptions to this rule require informed written consent from all affected clients, i.e., an “ethical wall”. In some circumstances, a conflict of interest can never be waived by a client. In perhaps the most common example encountered by the general public, the same firm should not represent both parties in a divorce or child custody matter. Found conflict can lead to denial or disgorgement of legal fees, or in some cases (such as the failure to make mandatory disclosure), criminal proceedings. In the United States, a law firm usually cannot represent a client if its interests conflict with those of another client, even if they have separate lawyers within the firm, unless (in some jurisdictions) the lawyer is segregated from the rest of the firm for the duration of the conflict. Law firms often employ software in conjunction with their case management and accounting systems in order to meet their duties to monitor their conflict of interest exposure and to assist in obtaining waivers.”

Wikipedia also lists the following methods for mitigation of conflicts of interest:

Removal

“Blind trust”

Disclosure

Recusal

N Srinivasan, in an attempt to retain his position as BCCI president, has placed his CSK shareholdings in a ‘players’ trust‘.  This, however, did not cut any ice with the Supreme Court since the remaining 71% shares were still owned by India Cements in which he and his family members hold a controlling interest.

Disclosure and recusal sometimes go hand-in-hand where the (usually prior) disclosure of a conflict of interest may lead to the official abstaining himself from any deliberations where a personal stake could affect the outcome.

The stakes are high. The aforesaid letter is just the beginning.

The next step would be for the BCCI and state associations to set out code of ethics and conduct for players, office bearers and umpires.

Will N Srinivasan see the writing on the wall and step down from the ICC?

IPL Governing Council buys time for all concerned, except the fans

Trust the BCCI (more specifically, the IPL Governing Council) to appoint a working group to look into the recommendations of the Lodha panel.

Franchises’ input into the process is ostensibly the reason touted by the council.

It is an excuse to buy more time. It does not come as a surprise; the BCCI is split into two warring factions, one for ICC chief N Srinivasan and the other against.

The BCCI has six additional weeks to arrive at a decision.

“The show must go on,” says IPL chairman Rajiv Shukla.

It’s evident that there will be another IPL next year with eight teams, not six.

There will be yet another auction, the players and support staff will be happy that they are not monetarily or otherwise affected, the Supreme Court verdict will be honored—if not in principle.

The question on everyone’s mind: What is N Srinivasan going to do?
Embed from Getty Images
His position as ICC chairman is even more untenable by the day.

Can he pull yet another rabbit out of his hat?

The governing council’s decision has given him time to ponder his limited options.

If the BCCI (and the ICC) is serious about clearing the mess that is the IPL, the India Cements strongman has to exit.

Whether the CSK and RR franchises are terminated is moot. The Supreme Court verdict is less harsh than what the rules dictate.

Teams have been terminated for less.

The BCCI has painted itself into an inglorious corner with its inability and unwillingness to clean up its Augean stables.

It waited for the Supreme Court to burn them down, instead.

Is it now delaying only for the Supreme Court commission to drive the final nail into its coffin when it completes its investigation into the allegations against IPL COO Sundar Raman?

That will be Judgment Day indeed.