Sachin Tendulkar hits back at BCCI for not clarifying their stance beforehand
Getty
Sachin Tendulkar has rejected BCCI ombudsman’s confirmation of his position being in the 'tractable category', and he held the board 'responsible for the situation'. The issue arose because of his dual role as a member of the BCCI's Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC) and an 'icon' with Mumbai Indians.
After receiving Sachin Tendulkar and VVS Laxman’s replies, BCCI Ombudsman came to the conclusion that Tendulkar and Laxman are in potential conflicts and that’s why both the individuals stand 'conflicted'. However, the Ombudsman’s office also added that the conflict is "tractable" which means they can continue with their respective franchises.
As per BCCI’s Constitution, "Tractable conflict" means both Tendulkar and Laxman can continue to keep their positions with Mumbai Indians and Sunrisers Hyderabad respectively, while being part of the CAC, but that is subject to the fact that the duo will have to recuse themselves should any former or current representative/employee of the franchise apply for an India/BCCI job.
However, this hasn’t gone down well with the Mumbaikar and in his freshly-drafted 13-point response to BCCI ombudsman and ethics officer Justice (Retd) DK Jain, Tendulkar requested for CoA chief Vinod Rai and BCCI CEO Rahul Johri to be asked to "clarify their position" on the matter.
"Without prejudice to the aforesaid, the Noticee submits that it is surprising that the BCCI, being the very authority responsible for the Noticee's empanelment to the Cricket Advisory Committee ("CAC"), is presently taking a position that the Noticee is exposed to an alleged conflict of interest.
"It is reiterated that, the Noticee was declared as the Mumbai Indians 'ICON' post his retirement in 2013, which was much prior to his appointment to the CAC in 2015."
While Laxman had added that he might’ve applied for recusal if the BCCI doesn’t clarify their stand, which he stated is dual at the moment, Tendulkar stated that neither the BCCI CEO nor the CoA had ever clarified the terms of reference vis-Ă -vis his appointment in the CAC and he was very well appointed despite his position with Mumbai Indians being in the public domain.Â
"The Noticee (Tendulkar) has time and again sought clarification from the BCCI on the scope of his role in the CAC - but has not received a response from BCCI till date. BCCI is aware that the CAC merely performs an advisory/recommendatory role - and therefore, the Noticee's role as a Mumbai Indians Icon (which in fact has always been in the public domain) cannot, in any practical way, conflict with his involvement in the CAC."
"The Noticee fails to understand how the BCCI (after having appointed him to the CAC) can now maintain its current stand that he is in a position of 'tractable' conflict of interest. The BCCI Response does not clarify this variance in its stance and the Noticee requests the Hon'ble Ethics Officer to call upon BCCI Officials, Mr. Rahul Johri and Mr. Vinod Rai to clarify this position."
The former Indian cricketer has also pointed out that he had recused himself from the recruitment process of the national Under-19 selection committee as his son Arjun Tendulkar was a contender in the team, which meant Vinod Rai had to directly appoint Odisha’s Debasish Mohanty to replace Venkatesh Prasad in the committee after the latter took a role in the Kings XI Punjab team.
Cricket FootBall Kabaddi
Basketball Hockey
SportsCafe
