Ramachandra Guha exposes conflict of interest cases and other grey sides of Indian cricket in his farewell note to Vinod Rai, head of the Supreme Court-appointed Committee of Administrators
Photo Imaging/Ravi Jadhav. Original pic/getty images
Excerpts of Ramachandra Guha's letter to Vinod Rai:
ADVERTISEMENT
Not-so-Sunny connection
Sunil Gavaskar is head of a company which represents Indian cricketers while commenting on those cricketers as part of the BCCI TV commentary panel. This is a clear conflict of interest. Either he must step down/withdraw himself from PMG completely or stop being a commentator for BCCI.
No moonlighting, please
No person under contract with an India team, or with the NCA, should be allowed to moonlight for an IPL team too. BCCI in its carelessness (or otherwise) might have drafted coaching/support staff contracts to allow this dual loyalty business, but while it might be narrowly legal as per existing contracts, it is unethical, and antithetical to team spirit, leading to much jealousy and heart-burn among the coaching staff as a whole.
Also read - Ramachandra Guha resigns as BCCI administrator
Superstar culture nauseating
The 'superstar' culture that afflicts the BCCI means that the more famous the player (former or present) the more leeway he is allowed in violating norms and procedures. (Dhoni was captain of the Indian team while holding a stake in a firm that represented some current India players.) This must stop -- and only we can stop it.
Ganguly, a case in point
Conflict of interest is rampant in the State Associations as well. One famous former cricketer is contracted by media houses to comment on active players while serving as President of his State Association. Others have served as office-bearers in one Association and simultaneously as coaches or managers in another. The awarding of business contracts to friends and relatives by office-bearers is reported to be fairly widespread.
Also read - India must take part in Champions Trophy: Ramachandra Guha
Kumble issue badly handled
The Indian team's record this past season has been excellent; and even if the players garner the bulk of the credit, surely the Head Coach and his support staff also get some. In a system based on justice and merit, the Head Coach's term would have been extended.
Instead, Kumble was left hanging, and then told the post would be re-advertised afresh.
Clearly, the issue has been handled in an extremely insensitive and unprofessional manner by the BCCI CEO and the BCCI office-bearers, with the COA, by its silence and inaction, unfortunately being complicit in this regard.
Too much power for seniors
Surely giving senior players the impression that they may have a veto power over the coach is another example of superstar culture gone berserk? Such a veto power is not permitted to any other top level professional team in any other sport in any other country.
Already, in a dismaying departure from international norms, current Indian players enjoy a veto power on who can be the members of the commentary team.
If it is to be coaches next, then perhaps the selectors and even office-bearers will follow?
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
