Indian cricketing community slams BCCI’s conflict ruling

In his order following a conflict of interest petition filed against Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman, BCCI Ethics Officer, Justice DK Jain, has ruled that cricketers must abide by the ‘one post at a time’ clause in the Supreme-Court-approved BCCI constitution.

The Indian cricketing fraternity has termed as harsh the restriction proposed by the Board’s ethics officer on holding more than one post at a time, be it doing commentary or running a coaching academy.

BCCI logo(AFP)

In his order following a conflict of interest petition filed against Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman, BCCI Ethics Officer, Justice DK Jain, has ruled that cricketers must abide by the ‘one post at a time’ clause in the Supreme-Court-approved BCCI constitution. If implemented, many former and current cricketers will fall foul of the conflict rule due to their multiple roles—doing commentary, being in cricket administration, running a coaching academy and working with IPL teams.

Sachin Tendulkar, Ganguly, Sunil Gavaskar, Harbhajan Singh, Anil Kumble, Sanjay Manjrekar, Virender Sehwag, Gautam Gambhir, Laxman and Irfan Pathan are all doing commentary in the World Cup. If the rules are enforced, those holding many positions will be affected.

As per the order covering current players, those like Harbhajan, Parthiv Patel, Pathan and Manoj Tiwary can wield the mike only on retirement.

Ganguly is Delhi Capitals mentor, Star Sports commentator and Cricket Association of Bengal president. Tendulkar and Laxman can either be in the dugouts of Mumbai Indians and Sunrisers Hyderabad respectively, or do commentary. With commentators also coming under scrutiny, there is concern amid players.

Former India left-arm spinner and ex-national selector, Venkatapathy Raju, said: “It is a little bit harsh. If players can play in IPL and for the country, why stop commentators? The rule should be applied only if there is a straight conflict, or if you are fully contracted as a coach.”

Raju gave the example of Australia. “In the Big Bash, Australian selectors are allowed to do commentary. So, there’s no issue in doing commentary as long as you are not expressing your views on selection.”

When former skipper Mark Taylor was on the Cricket Australia board, he was allowed to do commentary. Mark Waugh as national selector was also doing Big Bash commentary.

Indian cricketers are also miffed that while their professional options will be limited, there are no such restrictions on foreign players. Ex-Australia skipper Ricky Ponting, head coach of Delhi Capitals, is assistant coach at the World Cup.

Madan Lal, former India pacer and coach, saw it as a ploy to suppress cricketers. “Then it should be one post at a time for all our leaders (politicians), why do they sit on so many bodies? In this age there’s no such thing as an honorary job. Where’s the conflict of interest of a cricketer having a coaching academy? If he doesn’t have any other source of income what else will he do? Will he leave the academy and go to the state association? The only criterion should be that the job has to be done with honesty. Our board was one of the best, what has happened to it now?”

Manjrekar, a full-time commentator, said: “Once I chose a career in media, I declined all offers that would result in a conflict of interest. It’s a principle I have held dear for 20 years.”

The demand for commentators has increased since Star Sports opened regional channels for IPL, and the World Cup.

Former India batsman, coach and selector, Anshuman Gaekwad, said: “There’s retainership for national team players, against which dos and donts apply. If commentators are not on retainership, then can you restrict someone you are not paying?”

A former India cricketer turned commentator said, requesting anonymity: “To me this rule precludes a former cricketer from being an administrator. A president’s post in a state association is usually voluntary, so why would a former cricketer, whose best chance of making a living even after retiring would be from the game, want to become one if you stop him from talking or writing on cricket?

“I understand being a coach and not being allowed to do commentary because usually a coach gets paid for the job, but why an administrator?”

The BCCI is expected to set the deadline of a fortnight to choose between commentary assignments and official positions with the Board and IPL franchises.

The Ethics Officer was quoted by PTI as saying: “I have only interpreted the Lodha reforms for future guidance; I have not done anything extraordinary... Now it is for BCCI to enforce it.”