The skeletons tumble out of the BCCI closet

Sharad Pawar's daughter claimed a couple of months ago that her family did not financially benefit from the IPL. The bit to note there is that she did not claim her family was not connected to the IPL at all. What she said was that they did not financially benefit. i.e. their investment was a flop.

That's akin to a burglar claiming that he should have been let off since he had been caught by the police before he stole anything.

When Chirayu Amin was made the interim IPL commissioner after Lalit Modi was sacked, I wondered about the linkages between Shashank Manohar, Sharad Pawar and Chirayu Amin.

The news that Chirayu Amin was part of a consortium led by a company partly owned by Sharad Pawar & family reinforces my belief that there's a serious clean-up act needed in the BCCI.

Now, the only bit of the puzzle that's not yet evident is the fact that Shashank Manohar and Chirayu Amin have a business / family relationship as well.

'Conflict of interest' seems such an archaic term. Maybe we should just call it a 'cabal of interests'.

Louis Brandeis, a member of the US Supreme Court, once wrote in a 1913 edition of "Harper's weekly":

Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.

It's high time the same principles were applied to the BCCI.

It announced earlier this week that there would be no Indian participation in the cricket event at the 2010 Guangzhou Asian Games.

I've got no problems with that. The BCCI is the governing body for cricket, and it is well within its right to identify which tournaments it's contracted players participate in.

However, the BCCI then went on to clarify that the decision was taken since the schedules were made well in advance and that the domestic season would be underway.

This is where I have a problem. Somehow, it seems inconceivable that the BCCI fixes up schedules in advance or adheres to schedules drawn up well in advance doesn't quite.

After all, among other recent achievements, they've tried to tweak around with a scheduled 7 ODI series against Australia, successfully tweaked a 2 test 5 ODI series against New Zealand, agreed to a tour of Zimbabwe at short notice & urgently scheduled multiple series involving Sri Lanka.

It so obviously has something to do with the fact that the BCCI would need to be WADA-compliant for the cricket team to be allowed to play at the Asian Games. After all, if the main side was too busy, it wouldn't have been tough to put together a 2nd XI.

Labels: asian games, bcci, conflict of interest, indian premier league, scheduling, sharad pawar

Thus spake Jagadish @ 1:11 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Johnson Cherian, Lalit Modi and a couple of domains

Over 3 years ago, I'd written about one of the BCCI's domains - bcciratings.com. The domain was registered under a name 'Johnson Cherian'. I now notice that the domain has Lalit Modi as an administrative and technical contact.

Tinu Cherian reckons that the ownership details of iplt20.com changed on 19 April.

I don't think his reasoning is right. The 'Updated 1 hour ago' entry he points to merely indicates that the whois server fetched the data 1 hour ago. Just click on the "Refresh" link to see the last update details change.

But yes, the larger issue is that iplt20.com and clt20.com (the Champions Twenty20 League domain) are owned by someone from Modi Entertainment Network, even though the BCCI's address is provided.

So, is Johnson Cherian someone who works for Lalit Modi at the BCCI office? He does seem to work at Modi Entertainment Network, since he is listed as the administrative contact for modi.com as well.

In passing, you can actually go and buy the iplt20.com domain. The whois record indicates the domain expired over a month ago.

For the record, just in case the ownership data changes, here's what the whois information looks like:

iplt20.com

Registrant
Email:
Organization: BCCI/IPL
Address: CRICKET CENTER,WANKHEDE STADIUM,CHURCHGATE
City: Mumbai
State: Maharashtra
Country: IN
Postal Code: 400020
Phone: +91.2222800300
Fax:
Name: bcci ipl

Domain : iplt20.com

Administrative Contact :
Name: bcci
Organization: BCCI/IPL
Address: CRICKET CENTER,WANKHEDE STADIUM,CHURCHGATE
City: Mumbai
State: Maharashtra
Postal Code: 400020
Country: IN
Phone: +91.2222800300
Fax: 0
Email:

Technical Contact :
Name: bcci
Organization: BCCI/IPL
Address: CRICKET CENTER,WANKHEDE STADIUM,CHURCHGATE
City: Mumbai
State: Maharashtra
Postal Code: 400020
Country: IN
Phone: +91.2222800300
Fax: 0
Email:

Created on.......: 2008-03-14
Expired on.......: 2012-03-14
Last updated on..: 2009-01-14

clt20.com

Registrant :
Email:
Organization: NA
Address: BCCI,Cricket Center,Churchgate
City: Mumbai
State: Maharashtra
Country: IN
Postal Code: 400020
Phone: +91.1111111
Fax:
Name: Lalit Modi

Domain : clt20.com

Administrative Contact :
Name: Lalit
Organization: NA
Address: BCCI.Cricket Center,Churchgate
City: Mumbai
State: Maharashtra
Postal Code: 400020
Country: IN
Phone: +91.2266637373
Fax: 0
Email:

Technical Contact :
Name: Lalitk
Organization: NA
Address: BCCI.Cricket Center,Churchgate
City: Mumbai
State: Maharashtra
Postal Code: 400025
Country: IN
Phone: +91.2266637373
Fax: 0
Email:

Created on.......: 2009-02-05
Expired on.......: 2013-02-05
Last updated on..: 2010-01-12

Labels: conflict of interest, domain, indian premier league, ipl 2010, lalit modi, website

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:50 am | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Hardly breaking news - Sunil Gavaskar faces conflict of interest situation yet again

An English newspaper editor once wrote about Sunil Gavaskar - "He has an inability to realize a conflict of interest even when it stared at him in the face". He keeps proving it right every now and then.

In early 2007, he and Ricky Ponting had a slanging match when Gavaskar commented on Australia's behaviour and in response Ponting pointed out that Gavaskar had no business talking of behaviour when he had famously dragged along Chetan Chauhan after being given out lbw off Lillee at the MCG in 1980.

Then last year he alleged at race being involved in Mike Procter's decision to ban Harbhajan for 3 tests after the events at Sydney. David Morgan, the then President-elect of the ICC, expressed concern over the conflict of interest (Gavaskar was ICC Cricket Committee chairman & cricket columnist/commentator). A couple of months later, there were rumours that Gavaskar would be asked to choose from one of his roles and in April of 2008, he resigned from his role as chairman of the ICC's Cricket Committee.

In a column published last weekend, he rubbished John Buchanan's idea of having multiple captains by wondering aloud why people even bothered listening to him. He pointed out that Buchanan had successfully got roles within the Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) support staff for a lot of Queensland friends. He also generally rubbished Buchanan's coaching skills, qualifications & achievements.

Sunil Gavaskar is a member of the IPL's Governing Council. Thus, he really has no business passing judgement on the strategies and plans proposed or adopted by any of the teams that are playing in the tournament. If he isn't on the governing council, he is well justified in criticizing (or applauding) what the various teams do (or don't do). But since he is, surely it is a huge conflict of interest. If there was some decision that the IPL Governing Council needed to make regarding something related to KKR, that team would be be perfectly justified in demanding that Sunny recused himself from the proceedings.

Labels: conflict of interest, gavaskar, indian premier league, ipl 2009, twenty20

Thus spake Jagadish @ 5:46 pm | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Weekend news: Trescothick retires, Gavaskar to be retired?

Two significant events happened over the weekend.

Marcus Trescothick announced his retirement from international cricket a week after he withdrew from Somerset's pre-season tour of the UAE due to a recurrence of the stress-related illness that caused him to pull out of the 2006 Ashes tour and the tour of India earlier that year. Given his discomfort at touring, it may be assumed that he won't sign up for the IPL.

Sunil Gavaskar is in a soup this time for sure with the ICC bosses. He had written a scathing column last week in which he referred to England and Australia as dinosaurs and defended the BCCI's stand in Australia vis-a-vis the racial remark allegations against Harbhajan.

Gavaskar keeps getting into trouble. In January, after Mike Procter pronounced a 3-test ban on Harbhajan, he was accused of (and rightly so) alleging that Procter's decision was racially biased.

Last year, Gavaskar angered Ponting following his comments on the Australian team's behaviour. In that post, I wrote:

It may not be a bad idea for Gavaskar to realize that there're genuine conflicts of interest between his duties as the chairman of the ICC's Cricket Committee and his rights as a columnist. I don't remember who, but I'm sure I've read a comment piece some time ago by a columnist/editor in (possibly) 'The Times' which talked about Gavaskar's "inability to realize a conflict of interest even when it stared at him in the face". If Gavaskar had concerns about Australia's behaviour, I'm sure there are right 'channels' to get his concerns addressed, especially since his committee 'deals with any matters or issues relating to the game or the playing of the game.' (sic)

One year later, we run into the same problem. While I'm of the opinion that the committee that he heads hasn't really achieved anything of note (umpiring standards are pathetic, player behaviour is pathetic, over rates are pathetic, usage of technology is ambiguous, cricket schedules are pathetic & crazy), I really hope he opts to stay on the committee.

He used to be a very good commentator but in the last half-decade or so, his commentary skills have dipped alarmingly. I'm fairly sure cricket production houses will also favour him remaining on the committee rather than stay on in the commentary box for the simple reason that they won't have to keep erecting a fence every time he goes on air, for that's where he is sitting all the time!

Sample this: At Perth, when Kumble announced that India would bat first, my first reaction was "Go for it, Jumbo! Great, bold decision in the context of the series!". Harsha Bhogle asked Gavaskar what he felt. Gavaskar said he'd have opted to bowl first factoring in the weather, India having 3 seamers and Australia having 2 inexperienced openers. He'd barely finished the sentence when he said that on the other hand, India had batted first and got over 600 at Leeds in 2002 on a green wicket that aided swing bowling, so batting first was a good idea too. This piece of expert commentary really sealed it for me and I've now lost respect in his abilities as a commentator.

So, for the sake of us cricket fans, Mr. Gavaskar, please stay on the committee and off the tube!

Labels: comments, conflict of interest, england, gavaskar, india, perth 2008, sydney 2008, television, trescothick

Thus spake Jagadish @ 3:19 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

If it's a tour of Australia, there must be a selection controversy

Almost exactly four years ago, just before the Indian team left for a tour of Australia, Abhijit Kale was banned by the BCCI for attempting to bribe selectors for a place in the national team (or was it an India A side?).

This time around, with another tour of Australia coming up, another issue related to the selection committee has cropped up, this time it has to with the way Dilip Vengsarkar has been allegedly treated by BCCI administrators.

Vengsarkar has been in the news for the past month or so since quite a few BCCI officials have taken umbrage at him writing columns, and earning a living from them. This apparently violates the board's policy. The board then went one step further, putting out a list of do's and don't's, all of which were essentially to press home the fact that the BCCI executives and administrators were the bosses and not the selectors.

One of the directives, relating to being involved with player agents, is noteworthy, in that it seeks to eliminate any potential conflict of interest. Yet, it is also interesting to note that CricketNext reports that Niranjan Shah tried to get his son selected for an India A tour.

Jaydev Shah scored 255 runs from 11 first-class innings, 40 from 4 list-A innings and 86 from 4 domestic Twenty20 innings last season. The season before that was equally pathetic. He isn't a bowler either. So there's no evidence to suggest that he deserved an India A spot.

Clearly there's a conflict of interest here. The BCCI should ensure that none of its office bearers' sons/daughters/close relatives are playing for any of the first-class teams in India.

Getting back to Vengsarkar, he then promptly shot off an email to Sharad Pawar, which obviously got leaked again, just like emails tend to when it comes to BCCI matters.

The matter, at this point in time, seems to have been swept under the carpet. But I'm fairly sure Vengsarkar is just biding his time. BCCI officials have been very prompt in asking him to quit if he doesn't like the guidelines. It really is high time they got off the high horse and realized that they exist because of the game. The first thing that needs to change is the name of the board - just call it the Indian Cricket Board. Remove the Control!

But that's a bit too much to expect from a bunch of people who don't care if the Indian team plays Australia in a test match after one warm-up game. As if this wasn't shocking enough, there are indications that Cricket Australia agreed to a BCCI request to shorten a warm-up game to two days.

The game is against the Australian Capital Territory XI and there are two ways to look at it. There's not much cricketing benefit from playing an extra day against a side which plays various state 2nd XIs and so the team might as well proceed quickly to Perth, where they haven't played a test match for 15 years. The other way to look at it is that any sort of valuable match practice possible has been lost, and the packed itinerary is to blame. The series against Pakistan ends on December 12 and the first tour game in Australia is on December 20.

To make matters worse, at this point in time, it isn't even immediately apparent which quick bowlers will be touring Australia. If Zaheer, Munaf, RP Singh or Sreesanth aren't going to be fit, why bother turning up with Ishant, Irfan and Ranadeb Bose?!

Labels: australia, bcci, conflict of interest, ind v aus 2008, india, injury, scheduling, selection, selectors, sharad pawar, vengsarkar

Thus spake Jagadish @ 1:10 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Some angry cricketers

Ricky Ponting is seething over Sunil Gavaskar's remarks last week that Australia's behaviour made them a less liked bunch of winners compared to the West Indies sides of the 1970s and 1980s. So Ponting went ahead and made the obligatory reference to Gavaskar dragging Chetan Chauhan to the boundary after copping a bad decision at Melbourne in 1980/81. This wasn't the first time Gavaskar had pointed out Australia's bad behaviour. He did so in 2003, while delivering the Colin Cowdrey lecture at Lord's.

Aside from referring to Gavaskar's antics at Melbourne (curiously, he didn't refer to Sunny's 36 at Lord's in 1975), Ponting talked about India's hopeless record in tests and said that he knew who he'd rather watch. I hope his national cricket board was listening. They seem rather over keen to have India play Australia, at various venues - now Ireland after Malaysia last year. Ponting also said that his team was placing a lot of emphasis on behaviour, something which he talked about a in 2005 and John Buchanan talked about in 2006. Maybe they're not doing enough - Australian players made seven visits to the ICC Match Referee's room in 2007, Ponting doing so twice.

It may not be a bad idea for Gavaskar to realize that there're genuine conflicts of interest between his duties as the chairman of the ICC's Cricket Committee and his rights as a columnist. I don't remember who, but I'm sure I've read a comment piece some time ago by a columnist/editor in (possibly) 'The Times' which talked about Gavaskar's "inability to realize a conflict of interest even when it stared at him in the face". If Gavaskar had concerns about Australia's behaviour, I'm sure there are right 'channels' to get his concerns addressed, especially since his committee 'deals with any matters or issues relating to the game or the playing of the game.' (sic)

The other player who should actually be very angry, but probably isn't, is Denesh Ramdin. Rahul Dravid, while defending Sehwag's inclusion in the light of yet another low score, seemed to get a little angry.

I get asked this question why are you supporting Sehwag. Anyway my supporting Sehwag, it is not like I'm supporting Joe Bloggs, some Ramdin or Ramakdin or something.

Joe Bloggs, I can understand. Ramakdin, less so. But Ramdin? I mean, why pick on a 21-year old who's just about made it to the West Indies squad for the tournament?

Update: I wonder if Dravid or Gavaskar should point out that India beats Australia hollow when you compare recent one-day record against England because Ponting only referred to India's poor test record.

Labels: 2007 world cup, australia, behaviour, conflict of interest, dravid, gavaskar, india, ponting, ramdin, sehwag, sledging, west indies, world cup

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:52 pm | Sledge/Read 6 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Conflict of interest

I wonder if the ICC would intervene if Broad senior ended up being a match referee for a game involving Broad junior.

Is there an explicit clause somewhere in any of the ICC's codes of conduct which would prevent such an obvious conflict of interest?

Labels: conflict of interest, match referee

Thus spake Jagadish @ 5:28 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]