With former Indian skipper Sourav Ganguly openly expressing his displeasure over issuance of conflict of interest notice to Rahul Dravid by Ethics Officer, many within the BCCI have now started questioning his own intentions over going against Supreme Court-backed Justice Lodha panel draft.
Former India middle-order batsman Dravid got a notice after Madhya Pradesh Cricket Association (MPCA) member Sanjay Gupta complained to Justice (retd) DK Jain (BCCI ethics officer) to take note of Dravid’s current position of NCA director and vice-president of India Cements Group, which owns Indian Premier League (IPL) franchise Chennai Super Kings.
Ganguly on Wednesday expressed his outrage using social media platform. “New fashion in Indian cricket... conflict of interest... Best way to remain in news... god help Indian cricket... Dravid Gets Conflict of Interest Notice from BCCI Ethics Officer,” he tweeted.
It is important to mention here that Gupta is the same person who earlier filed similar Conflict of Interest complaints against former cricketers VVS Laxman and Sachin Tendulkar for their roles as Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC) members and icon/mentor of IPL franchises Sunrisers Hyderabad and Mumbai Indians, respectively.
“Sourav is president of Cricket Association of Bengal (CAB) and also mentoring IPL team Delhi Capitals. He was also doing commentary earlier. He fully understands that in future, he too needs these contracts once he is out of CAB for cooling off period,” a senior BCCI official said.
Ganguly escaped the conflict of interest sword during IPL early this year by citing BCCI’s own lacuna where CAC contract was not renewed for some reason.
Not to forget that BCCI’s new constitution has clearly stated the “conflict of interest” clause is explained under rule 38 (4). “It is clarified that no individual may occupy more than one of the following posts at a single point of time except where prescribed under these rules: a) player (current), (b) selector/member of the cricket committee, (c) team official, (d) commentator, (e) match official, (f) administrator/office-bearer, (g) owner of a cricket academy,” states the constitution.
Dravid’s issue is no different. Though he is not into administration but he too draws two simultaneous salaries as head of National Cricket Academy (NCA) and employee of Indian Cements. Despite Justice Lodha panel’s recommendations to help former cricketers into running the cricket administration in India, the current conflict of interest rules are stacking against them.
“The honorary nature of posts in cricket administration is forcing most of the former cricketers to explore the revenue-generating opportunities within the BCCI or state cricket associations. The cricketers feel that there is money to be made as television commentators, consultants to player-agencies, big corporates and IPL franchises. And that’s the prime reason none of these are willing to make monetary sacrifice in order to serve the game,” said various cricket administrators who are facing uncertain future because of cooling off period.
