Srini culpable in IPL scandal
Top court hearing on Nov. 24 Will CSK, Raj Royals be disqualified from IPL?
The Mukul Mudgal probe panel report has indicated that N. Srinivasan, former BCCI president, was culpable of many acts of omission, leaving him a lot to answer for with regard to the shady events that brought disrepute to the Indian Premier League and to cricket.
The report, made public Monday by the Supreme Court, indicates Mr Srinivasan was aware of a player identified only as Individual 3 ( thought to be from Chennai Super Kings) of violating the IPL code of conduct, but did nothing to stop him. He also tried to shield his sonin- law Gurunath Meiyappan as a mere “cricket enthusiast”, the report says.
“This individual ( Srinivasan) along with four other BCCI officials was aware of the violation of the players’ code of conduct by Individual 3, but no action was taken against Individual 3 by any of the aforesaid officials who were aware of the infraction,” the report reads.
The misdemeanours of players are not being dealt with in the case of Cricket Association of Bihar versus the BCCI.
For the record, the report, made public by the court on Monday, cleared Mr Srinivasan of betting, spot and match- fixing, something he was not being investigated for anyway.
But the more surprising revelation was that of IPL chief operating officer Sundar Raman. The report says Mr Raman, who is a well- known confidant of Mr Srinivasan, “knew a contact of a bookie and had contacted him eight times in one season”.
Listed as Individual 12 in the report, Mr Raman said he knew the person, “but however claimed to be unaware of his connection with betting activities”. His position as an officer of the BCCI becomes untenable now, but the question is: will a reconstituted board with the president back take action against his close associate, who is the IPL COO?
On Mr Meiyappan, the report noted: “Investigations have confirmed that this individual ( Gurunath Meiyappan) was a team official of a franchise. He was frequently meeting Individual 2 ( name withheld) in his hotel room. This strengthens the conclusion of the committee in its interim report dated February 10 that he was in close touch with Individual 2.”
Individual 2 is obviously a prominent player of Chennai Super Kings. In this case too, Mr Srinivasan is culpable of not acting to correct the situation.
The other major count of misdemeanour against Mr Srinivasan is that he tried to shield his son- in- law as a mere “cricket enthusiast” when he well knew the real position of how Mr Meiyappan was sitting in the players’ dugout and how he was privy to team strategies as he was often in close attendance at team IPL events.
Mr Meiyappan, the report avers, was a team
official, if not the de facto owner, of CSK. Mr Meiyappan has been held guilty of having contacts with bookies and betting, so too Raj Kundra. And since the two were designated team officials, both their Indian Premier League teams — Chennai Super Kings and Rajasthan Royals — stand to be disqualified from the Indian Premier League. According to the relevant bylaw 11.3( c), the agreement can be terminated if “the Franchise, any Franchise Group Company and/ or any owner acts in any way which has a material adverse effect upon the reputation or standing of the League, BCCI- IPL, BCCI, the Franchise, the team ( or any other team in the League) and/ or the game of cricket.) of the IPL, which is a property of BCCI and registered under the Societies Act of Tamil Nadu, a team can be disqualified”. The question now is: Will the Supreme Court order sanctions on teams transgressing the Indian Premier League rules and regulations when it resumes hearing the case of the IPL scandals on November 24. Mr Kundra ( Individual 11), the report said, “was in touch with the bookies about betting, and thus by not reporting contact with the bookie, has violated BCCI/ IPL Anti- Corruption Code”, the report points out. Even more damning is the panel’s comment: “The committee also found that the investigation against this individual was abruptly and without reason stopped by the Rajasthan police upon receiving case papers from the Delhi police.”