Of­fi­cials ques­tion anom­alies, seek an­swers from GM

The New Indian Express - - SPORT - VENKATA KR­ISHNA B

NEARLY two months af­ter Syed Saba Karim, on the in­struc­tion of Com­mit­tee of Ad­min­is­tra­tors head Vinod Rai, brought in a mid-sea­son trans­fer rule, BCCI sec­re­tary Amitabh Choud­hary has ques­tioned the move. Not just that. He has termed it unau­tho­rised and un­con­sti­tu­tional.

In a mail ad­dressed to BCCI gen­eral man­ager Karim, CEO Rahul Johri, the of­fice-bear­ers and tech­ni­cal com­mit­tee chair­man Sourav Gan­guly, Choud­hary has ques­tioned the way the CoA is run­ning day-to-day af­fairs, given there is se­ri­ous dif­fer­ence of opin­ion be­tween Rai and Diana Edulji.

In Oc­to­ber, the BCCI brought in a mid-sea­son trans­fer rule for play­ers whose par­ents are gov­ern­ment employees. In this rule, a player can shift to an­other do­mes­tic team if one of his par­ents is trans­ferred to an­other state. Fi­nalised with­out the tech­ni­cal com­mit­tee’s ap­proval, this move first saw BCCI trea­surer Anirudh Chaud­hary writ­ing to the sec­re­tary about his griev­ances. Chaud­hary went on to ex­plain how the rule change ben­e­fited only two play­ers.

The play­ers are Tripura’s Pratyush Singh, who played for Jhark­hand ear­lier. He sought a trans­fer cit­ing his fa­ther, an IPS of­fi­cer, was posted to Tripura. Cu­ri­ously, his brother Utkarsh Singh con­tin­ues to rep­re­sent Jhark­hand.

The sec­ond player is Ro­han Choud­hary, who sought a trans­fer to Mi­zo­ram, as his fa­ther Ku­tub Ud­din Chowd­hury, em­ployed with New In­dia As­sur­ance, is posted in Aizawl. The BCCI sec­re­tary’s mail men­tions that Ro­han’s fa­ther has been posted in Aizawl since 1989 and hence he doesn’t need a trans­fer to play for Mi­zo­ram.

Ask­ing Karim to ex­plain the rea­son to change the rule, which ben­e­fits only two play­ers, Choud­hary wrote: “There is ab­so­lutely no merit in sin­gling out gov­ern­ment ser­vants for any ben­e­fits be­cause ser­vice con­di­tions with re­gard to trans­fers re­main the same for all cat­e­gories of employees any­where. Be­sides, all cit­i­zens are free to choose their em­ployer/place of em­ploy­ment.”

Cit­ing Singh’s case, where the player ap­plied for trans­fer only af­ter find­ing out he didn’t find a place in the Jhark­hand side, Choud­hary asked: “The bo­gus na­ture of this rule is fur­ther cor­rob­o­rated by the fact that while the fa­ther was trans­ferred in May and the son, who has now moved to Tripura un­der the so called new rule, did so only af­ter be­ing found not fit in a list of about 28 prob­a­bles in Septem­ber 2018 in an­other Ranji state.”

The rule change aside, Choud­hary has also sought an ex­pla­na­tion from Karim and Johri on the leak­ing of the re­port filed be­fore them by Mithali Raj, who ac­cused women’s team coach Ramesh Powar and Edulji of bias. With dif­fer­ences be­tween CoA members get­ting big­ger by the day, Choud­hary wrote: “The re­cent com­po­si­tion of the in­de­pen­dent com­mit­tee by just one in­di­vid­ual with dis­agree­ment demon­strated even about its for­ma­tion, the man­ner of its de­lib­er­a­tions, the re­fusal of half of the CoA to ac­cept its rec­om­men­da­tions es­tab­lish be­yond rea­son­able doubt that un­fet­tered and wan­ton ex­er­cise of power with­out re­spon­si­bil­ity or ac­count­abil­ity has not only taken hold at the BCCI, but has now be­come its hall­mark.”

BCCI sec­re­tary Amitabh Choud­hary

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.