BCCI ombudsman defends Sachin Tendulkar’s one-off commentary stint
Supreme Court ombudsman and ethics officer DK Jain has shot down rumours of ‘conflict of interest’ pertaining to Sachin Tendulkar after the BCCI objected to his on-air appearance during the World Cup. Six years since retirement, Tendulkar has never shown interest in pursuing commentary in the past.
The office of the Supreme Court-appointed ombudsman and ethics officer DK Jain has come out with three separate orders pertaining to former Indian cricketers - Sachin Tendulkar, VVS Laxman, and Sourav Ganguly. The order on Tendulkar was sent out by Jain's office on May 25 while that on Ganguly was sent just six days ago. Meanwhile, Laxman was handed his ruling just two days ago.
Six years since hanging up his boots, Tendulkar has never shown interest in commentary and has rejected offers on multiple occasions. However, BCCI officials have criticised Tendulkar’s decision to go on-air during the World Cup in England. But Jain has spoken in defence of the Mumbai-born cricketer saying that it was a ‘one-off’ incident.
"Someone in the cricket board is deliberately trying to tarnish the reputation of some of India's greatest cricketers and that is pretty evident. Tendulkar retired in 2013 and not once, twice but on multiple occasions, he had made it clear he is not interested in commentary. This one time, he happened to be in England and agreed to be in the commentary box just two weeks before the start of the tournament only for select matches.
"The English summer is when he holidays in the UK every year. He's a permanent presence at the Wimbledon. Because he was there, he agreed to do this stint. And that has given a reason for BCCI to say he cannot talk on air. How is that a conflict," sources told TOI.
However, in Laxman's case that the ombudsman has ruled the following: "… Clause (d) of the sub rule (4) of Rule 38 (in BCCI constitution) does not carve out any distinction between a 'commentator' engaged by or through BCCI or such a contract / agreement entered into by the individual directly. If an individual is associated with the BCCI in any capacity, and is a 'commentator', in my view clause (d) of sub-rule (4) of rule 38 gets attracted".
Cricket FootBall Kabaddi
Basketball Hockey
SportsCafe
0
0
0
0
0
0
Comments
Sign up or log in to your account to leave comments and reactions
0 Comments