Madhya Pradesh Cricket Association (MPCA) life member Sanjeev Gupta writing to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) Ethics Officer DK Jain on former cricketers being conflicted as per the new constitution had almost become a trend. After picking on Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman, the latest name Gupta zeroed in on was former India skipper Rahul Dravid. But the Committee of Administrators (CoA) have finally put their foot down and cleared Dravid of any conflict on Tuesday, 13 August.
Speaking to IANS, a CoA member said that the committee had already checked if the former skipper was eligible to take over at the National Cricket Academy (NCA) and if the need arises, they will further explain to Jain how and why Dravid isn't conflicted.
"If he thinks there is conflict that is his (Jain's) perception. It is okay, we will respond to it. We had okayed Dravid's appointment and we will inform the Ethics Officer on why and how it was cleared," the member explained.
While coming under the ambit of the National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA) is also something that was expected to be discussed at the meeting, the member said that it was a matter that was done and dusted.
“Whatever BCCI did earlier isn’t something that we are concerned about. The government asked us and we are citizens of the country and must follow the rules.”
But the move has been heavily criticised by the BCCI officials.
"This is nothing but an admission of failure of administration on the part of the BCCI CEO Rahul Johri and the CoA. The CEO gets paid an amount upward of Rs 5 crores an annum and has apparently been paid a bonus of about 5 crores or so too, but the administration under him has completely botched up the BCCI Anti-Doping program and specifically and spectacularly failed in the Prithvi Shaw matter.
"This step (to join forces with NADA) may have been taken just to avoid an inquiry into the Shaw incident being instituted and being taken to its logical conclusion. The CEO cannot escape scrutiny on the mishandling and the decision makers cannot escape scrutiny on the mishandling in this entire episode including this NADA business," the official had told IANS.
"This is a decision of policy nature and the CEO was in no position to take such a call and also, there seems to be some false assurance being given to the government."
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)