Former India cricketers Sachin Tendulkar and VVS Laxman appeared in person for their deposition in front of BCCI Ethics Officer and former justice of Supreme Court DK Jain at a five-star hotel in New Delhi on Tuesday in relation to the duo’s ‘conflict of interest’ issue.
Both Tendulkar and Laxman had been summoned by Justice Jain to explain their stand on the question of ‘conflict’ in relation to their position in BCCI’s Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC) and their position as mentors in IPL franchises Mumbai Indians and Sunrisers Hyderabad respectively. The meeting which lasted over four hours proved inconclusive.
While both former cricketers were present for the meeting, Tendulkar was also accompanied by his lawyer Amit Sibal.
“I represented Sachin in this matter. The hearing lasted for over four hours and still remains inconclusive. It will continue on May 20 but Tendulkar will not need to reappear for the next meeting,” Sibal told CricketNext on Tuesday.
It is believed like Tendulkar, Laxman will also not be required to make another appearance in front of Justice Jain. Last month, former India captain Sourav Ganguly had also deposed in front of Jain and the BCCI Ethics Officer is yet to come out with a ruling over the matter.
The complaint against Tendulkar was filed by Sanjeev Gupta of Madhya Pradesh Cricket Association (MPCA) and Tendulkar had asked Committee of Administrators (CoA) chairman Vinod Rai and BCCI CEO Rahul Johri to ‘clarify their position’.
“Without prejudice to the aforesaid, the noticee submits that it is surprising that the BCCI, being the very authority responsible for the noticees 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,” Tendulkar had written in his 13-point letter to BCCI on May 5.
Tendulkar’s response also added that a mentor or an ‘icon’ is not covered in the definition of a team official and his role is limited to providing guidance, inputs and inspiration to the younger team members.
Laxman in his reply to the Ethics Officer had said the roles of the CAC as told to him in 2015 included focusing on improving performances of the national team overseas, creating a pathway to track a young cricketer’s career from U-19 to India A to the international team, managing workload for fast bowlers, means to improve the quality of Indian spinners and education and life-skills for young cricketers.
“The allegation of the complainant are baseless as we are in no manner selectors of either players or coaches and CAC is not a permanent body,” he wrote in his reply.