If You Allow Spot-Fixing, Cricket Will be Killed: Supreme Court Admonishes N. Srinivasan
Supreme Court slammed suspended BCCI president N. Srinivasan for his conflict of interest in Indian cricket administration putting in doubt his aspiration to become boss of the Board for another term.
In March 2014, after his son-in-law and Chennai Super Kings team official Gurunath Meiyappan was indicted by a probe panel for betting and sharing team information, the Supreme Court had slammed N. Srinivasan continuing as Board of Control for Cricket in India chief as "nauseating". On Monday, a Special Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices TS Thakur and FM Kalifullah, made a series of stinging observations while slamming Srinivasan over conflict of interest issue in Indian Premier League. The judges also put a question mark over Srinivasan's return as BCCI president. (Complete IPL spot-fixing timeline | Sachin Tendulkar refuses to comment on probe report)
The following are 10 main points noted by the top court of the country:
On IPL being a BCCI product:
You can't make a distinction between BCCI and IPL. IPL a is a by-product of BCCI. Some people who are in BCCI now own a team. Now it has become a mutual benefit society.
On Srinivasan wearing two caps:
"Your duty as a president is to keep the show [IPL] running and to keep it clean. What is your duty as a team owner? To win the tournament."
On betting and spot-fixing:
"If you allow these things to happen, then you are killing the game of cricket. Cricket must be played in its true spirit and should remain a gentleman's game. If confidence of the people is shattered, then the game will be over."
On winning the trust of the public:
"Millions of fans are passionate about the game without having any stake in it. It is this public trust that the BCCI needed to pay attention to. Do you want to sit over the liquidation of the game in this country?"
On recognition for Indian cricket, globally:
"Recognition comes when one lakh people turn up at Eden Gardens to watch a match. That recognition is not because of Srinivasan. The benefit of doubt must go to the game rather than the individual."
On BCCI working committee taking action on erring members:
"Should the BCCI use their administrative mechanisms in this matter? Several conflict of interest issues will arise and these questions can't be wished away."
On Srinivasan contesting BCCI elections:
"You are assuming that the (Mudgal Committee) report has cleared you. You can't use BCCI rules to say that you will stand for elections, because the doctrine of public trust will apply.
On how Meiyappan has ruined Srinivasan's reputation:
"The report says you are not involved in betting or fixing or in stalling the investigation. But you have to ask whether despite those findings, you are an owner of a team which is playing, you are related to an individual (Gurunath Meiyappan) who is found in betting. Will that not affect your status as member of the BCCI?"
On individuals challenging the probe report:
"We don't expect people to stand up and confess. There could be corollaries and consequences arising from the inferences contained in the report. That you cannot escape."
On IPL committees and Srinivasan's role:
"You mean to say when a decision is taken in the BCCI, the president is a mute spectator in all this? That he has no say in the matter?"