Sachin Tendulkar sends letter to Ombudsman determining his role with MI

Tendulkar on Sunday filed a 14point written response to a notice sent by Ombudsman cum Ethics Officer Justice Retd DK Jain It was with regards to a Conflict of Interest complaint filed by the Madhya Pradesh Cricket Association MPCA member Sanjeev GuptaAs per the complainant Tendulkar and Laxman are allegedly performing dual roles first of a support staff in their respective IPL franchises Mumbai Indians MI and Sunrisers Hyderabad SRH and second as members of the Cricket Advisory Committee CACAt the outset the Noticee Tendulkar denies the contents of the Complaint in totality except the statements specifically admitted herein No part of the Complaint should be deemed to be admitted by the Noticee for lack of specific denials Tendulkar wrote in his responseSince Guptas complaints harped specifically on Tendulkars role in the MI the iconic cricketer in his response have made a full disclosure of his role in the franchiseThe Noticee Tendulkar has received no pecuniary benefit compensation from the Mumbai Indians IPL Franchise in his capacity as the Mumbai Indians ICON since his retirement and is certainly not employed with the Franchise in any capacityHe does not occupy any position nor has he taken any decision including selection of team players which could qualify as being in governance or management of the Franchise Accordingly there is no conflict of interest either under the BCCI Rules or otherwise worlds leading rungetter further explainedAs far as his role in the CAC is concerned Tendulkar mentioned that he was appointed as a member of the BCCI committee in 2015 which was only years after his involvement with the MIThe Noticee was appointed to the panel of the Cricket Advisory Committee CAC in the year 2015 The Honble Ethics Officer will appreciate that the Noticee was named as the ICON for Mumbai Indians much prior to his empanelment with the CAC which fact has always been in the public domainAccordingly the BCCI aware of the Noticees association with the Mumbai Indians Franchise at the time of his appointment to the CACTendulkar in his disclosure further makes it clear that the role of an icon the one he is performing right now in the IPL franchise team in no way is a position either in the management or the governance of the franchiseThe Complaint wrongly assumes that the Noticees association with the Mumbai Indians IPL Franchise iquestFranchiseiquest is in the capacity of governance management or employment thereby attracting a conflict under Rule 38 4His role is limited to providing guidance to the Franchise team by sharing his insights learnings and working closely with the younger members in the team to help them realise their true potentialOn his reply to Guptas question of him sitting in the teams dugout place specified for players and support staff only he termed the allegation as absurdA mentor cannot be qualified as management of the Franchise If the Complainants absurd logic were to be applied a physiotherapist trainer or a masseur would also be qualified as management of the Franchise Tendulkar responded making it clear that he is answerable to none of the support staffIt is also pertinent to note that the Mumbai Indians team has a head coach who works side by side with coaches for specific disciplines such as bowling batting etc in ultimate coordination with the Director of Cricket Operations none of whom the Noticee is answerable to or vice versa since his role is limited to that of providing guidance and motivation to the teamAlso in case of the Ombudsman willing to continue proceedings Tendulkar has requested for a personal hearing along with his legal representativesCatch up on all the latest T20 news and updates here Also download the new midday Android and iOS apps to get latest updates