Srinivasan,Raj Kundra named in IPL scandal report

[Crookbond]

Good point. Dhoni is not a co owner. http://zeenews.india.com/sports/cricket/icc-champions-trophy-2013/dhoni-held-stakes-in-rhiti-sports-in-past-owner_762629.html Although he held Rhiti stock for a limited period of time.

I think his wife is a share holder - that still makes it conflict of interest with Rhiti sports. But that India Cements level of conflict of interest is extreme paranoia. And why stop with players? For example, the physio of Mumbai Indians is the same as the physio of the Indian cricket team. Conflict of interest? :--D

[Precambrian]

You are missing the forest for the trees! The issue with Dhon is Rhiti Sports and Team India - not CSK and Team India. That level of conflict of interest is wide spread with entire Indian cricket and practically can't be avoided.

I'd completely agree with you had Rhiti been owned by Dhoni. but as it stands now, it is not.

[Precambrian]

I think his wife is a share holder - that still makes it conflict of interest with Rhiti sports. But that India Cements level of conflict of interest is extreme paranoia. And why stop with players? For example' date=' the physio of Mumbai Indians is the same as the physio of the Indian cricket team. Conflict of interest? :--D[/quote'] just saw this post Do we have evidence supporting your assertion? If true, then what Dhoni doing is just bollocks.

[Crookbond]

I'd completely agree with you had Rhiti been owned by Dhoni. but as it stands now' date=' it is not.[/quote'] The point is that he did at some point of time. Moreover, Pandey's statement can't be taken as face value since he hasn't given any particular evidence to back his claim. Not to forget, Sakshi also has shares which also makes it conflict of interest http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/ipl-spot-fixing-ms-dhoni-rhiti-sports-conflict-of-interest-documents/1/278584.html

[CG]

Dhoni conflict of interest has been discussed for so many years,Hope sanebhai is watching.

[sachin34357]

chennai franchise will be sold to adani

[BeautifulGame]

The Supreme Court has asked the BCCI counsel whether the Chennai Super Kings franchise should be disqualified in order to sort out the conflict of interest issues pertaining to the 2013 IPL corruption case. In the latest hearing of the case, on Thursday morning, the Supreme Court special bench of Justice T S Thakur and F M Kalifullah also told counsel appearing for the BCCI and N Srinivasan that the BCCI annual general meeting scheduled for December 17 should go ahead but by 'standing aside' the individual included in the investigation of the IPL corruption case. The court said the difference between Srinivasan's duty as president of the BCCI and his interest as an owner of an IPL team is "obvious". The court asked, "If there are so many anomalies, why can't the BCCI act according its rules and disqualify CSK?" Justice Thakur asked, "What is more valuable to Mr Srinivasan? Is it his office or his team?" The court also said that the "dual role" of MS Dhoni as the captain of CSK and vice president of India Cements is a matter of "concern." The court said that BCCI must put an end to all its controversies and move to conduct the election because "the life of the BCCI board is over", the court said. The Board taking any decision around the findings of the Mudgal probe, the court said, "must be a board which is legitimately in place and not a board which exists due to fortuitous circumstances." Justice Thakur opened the hearings this morning, and said, that the distinction between Srinivasan and India Cements "is getting to a vanishing point." Srinivasan's counsel was asked several details about India Cements, the owners of CSK. The court wanted to know who the real owners of India Cements were, who formed its board and whose decision it was to invest Rs 400 crore (approximately $100 million at the time) in the CSK franchise as well as information about the shareholding pattern in both CSK and India Cements, with particular reference to Srinivasan and his members of his family. The bench asked Srinivasan's counsel Kapil Sibal about whether it was India Cements who made decisions on the team's captain and coach. "Is the company selecting the team?... If Gurunath Meiyappan is not the real owner, then who is the ultimate controller [of India Cements and CSK] we wish to learn?" The BCCI counsel C A Sundaram was asked by the court as to what would be done if the court asked to take a decision, at which point Sundaram replied that he would take instructions from the BCCI and hoped that a decision pertaining to the IPL case with regard to CSK and Meiyappan, within ten days. Thakur then said, it was only at that point that the court would, " know what is brewing within the BCCI." The BCCI counsel then suggested to the court that the board could set up a disciplinary committee to hand out punishments to individuals found guilty in the Mudgal committee report. The bench said that for a disciplinary committee to be completely "above bias" and "legally valid," a new Board will have to be constituted following a fresh round of elections in which the parties involved in the IPL case would necessarily, not be able to contest. For the first time since any legal proceedings began around the 2013 IPL corruption case, the BCCI accepted that Gurunath Meiyappan, son in law of Srinivasan, was a "team official" for CSK. Counsel for Raj Kundra, co-owner of the Rajasthan Royals and one of four "non-playing" individual indicted by the Mudgal panel, informed the court that while he had been "suspended" by the BCCI in 2013, he is yet to receive a written notice of the same. A court observation is not binding but it does indicate the court's line of thinking in a case. The observation gives the party in question a chance to take the steps being advised. Following three and a half hours of discussion before the bench, Harish Salve, appearing for the litigant Cricket Association of Bihar concluded his arguments today. The next hearing in the case will be held on Monday, December 1.

So the SC observed whether CSK should be scrapped or not becoz of conflict of interest not due to Meyappan issue Also Srini had finally accepted Meyyappan was a team official lol

[zubinpepsi]

Srini could have avoided this mess.. if he had come forth earlier and apologized for what meyyapan had done.. and made steps to clean his franchise.. he would have had some credibility.. he was too bullish.. now everything is going to collapse (his franchise, bcci power and maybe icc power).. wat a d!ck..lol

[Tapioca]

Good point. Dhoni is not a co owner. http://zeenews.india.com/sports/cricket/icc-champions-trophy-2013/dhoni-held-stakes-in-rhiti-sports-in-past-owner_762629.html Although he held Rhiti stock for a limited period of time.

Dhoni is just a cricket enthusiast who hangs around Rhiti.

[Tapioca]

But he is not an employee of UB group. Objection is not about being captain of CSK as well as Indian team but being Vice Chairman of India cements. Most captains of the national teams have captain two teams either state team or corporate teams' date=' but because CSK is a commercial franchise owned by India Cements where Dhoni is VC or VP that is what makes situation a bit vulnerable.[/quote'] I can understand Dhoni's CoI when it involves Rhiti but what exactly is the problem with India Cements. Is is that he will unduly favour players involved with India Cements ? If so, it is not relevant because he is already associated with CSK that is owned by India Cements. Where else does the conflict of interest come from ?

[Number]

Arnab Goswami's newshour today on Dhoni and his conflict of interest.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Srini could have avoided this mess.. if he had come forth earlier and apologized for what meyyapan had done.. and made steps to clean his franchise.. he would have had some credibility.. he was too bullish.. now everything is going to collapse (his franchise, bcci power and maybe icc power).. wat a d!ck..lol

He was brazen.he thought he would be able to outmanuevre and arm twist everyone and if Supreme court and Mudgal hadnt been there he would have succeded.

[BeautifulGame]

BCCI's day of reckoning: SC should punish Srinivasan, Meiyappan not CSK We need to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. For all its perceived ills, the Indian Premier League has changed the landscape of Indian sports. It has not only made it possible for cricketers to earn a good living without playing for India, but has spurred a series of copycat leagues in other sports, from badminton to kabaddi. This mushrooming has suddenly made sports a viable career option in India, a country which needs all the employment opportunities it can get. Where before parents would squash the joy of sports out of their children and insist on hours of math tuition instead, now children have greater freedom to pursue the field of their dreams. That's why the Chennai Super Kings should not be scrapped. The franchise is the most successful team in the league and has a huge fan following in its home city. To disqualify it, as the Supreme Court suggested during today's hearings of Mudgal Committee report case, would be to knock down one of the strongest pillars that support the league. It would also demoralise the players, most of whom are pawns trapped in a much larger power game, and punish fans who are guilty of nothing more than being cricket lovers. The court should not consider the team that takes the field and its owners as indivisible. Other sporting leagues provide examples that the Supreme Court can follow. When the general manager of Juventus, Luciano Moggi was found guilty of match-fixing in the Serie A in 2006, the league might have been justified in scrapping the club in the same way trees are cut down to prevent disease from spreading to the whole forest. Instead, the football club was stripped of its two tainted titles, demoted to the second division for the first time in its history. That punished the club, but spared the players and the fans who could continue to support their team. Today, Juventus is on top of the Serie A standings once again (though the league) lost a great deal of its lustre thanks to the scandal. Earlier this year, Donald Sterling, the former owner of the Los Angeles Clippers in the NBA, was caught on camera making racist comments. The league and its new commissioner, Adam Silver, immediately swung in to action, conducted an investigation and found Sterling guilty. The league then*forced Sterling to sell the team*to Steve Ballmer, the co-founder of Microsoft and banned him from owning a team in the league. It punished the owner for his crime, but did not hold the entire organisation accountable for the wrong done by one person. And when former baseball star Pete Rose was found guilty of placing bets while playing for and managing the Cincinnati Reds in Major League Baseball in 1989, it was Rose who was banned for life from the game, not the team.* In the case of CSK, it is Gurunath Meiyappan and N Srinivasan who need to be held accountable (and possibly MS Dhoni but we don't know enough about his role in this mess yet). Meiyappan for betting while running the team and Srinivasan for attempting to cover up Meiyappan's role in the franchise, as well as his clear conflict of interest in owning an IPL team while being a BCCI official. The IPL franchise agreement has a provision for terminating a team if "the Franchisee, any Franchisee Group Company and/or any Owner acts in a way that has material 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." Both Srinivasan and Meiyappan could reasonably be found guilty of violating this clause (as could Raj Kundra, the co-owner of the Rajasthan Royals). But the remedy should be to force Srinivasan to sell CSK to a buyer with no stakes in the BCCI and ban Meiyappan and Srinivasan from cricket for life. That would punish the guilty while sparing the innocent, preventing the kind of collateral damage that would happen if the franchise was disqualified.

[zubinpepsi]

^^ very good article.. I agree.. Meyyapan and srinivasan should be punished/banned and not the team...

[Lord]

^^ very good article.. I agree.. Meyyapan and srinivasan should be punished/banned and not the team...

Then why were PWI and Kochi team scrapped without even reauctioning it?Gotta be consistent. CSK should be scrapped and players should go back to the auction pool. Though I agree Chennai franchise should be reauctioned

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Then why were PWI and Kochi team scrapped without even reauctioning it?Gotta be consistent. CSK should be scrapped and players should go back to the auction pool. Though I agree Chennai franchise should be reauctioned

Deccan was reauctioned and so should be CSK.

[zep1706]

^^ very good article.. I agree.. Meyyapan and srinivasan should be punished/banned and not the team...

Following the precedence that has been set by BCCI, CSK should be re-auctioned.

[achilles]

It is hilarious to see the double-standards of some ppl here. Seems like there is one rule for PWI, RR, KTK, DC, Lalit Modi, Sharad Pawar, Jag Dalmiya..... but there is another rule for Prophet Srinavasan Anna, Thiru Maninder Singh Dhobi Anna

[yoda]

So they are moving goal posts now. Earlier issue was corruption, match fixing, spot fixing, scuttling of investigation. No evidence to support any of these, so they have decided to dig up the issue of conflict of interest. Seems like goal is to remove CSK as a franchise. Might as well just get it over with instead of wasting any more of the common man's money.

[rkt.india]

So they are moving goal posts now. Earlier issue was corruption' date=' match fixing, spot fixing, scuttling of investigation. No evidence to support any of these, so they have decided to dig up the issue of conflict of interest. Seems like goal is to remove CSK as a franchise. Might as well just get it over with instead of wasting any more of the common man's money.[/quote'] Conflict of interest issue was always there. CSK as a franchise wont be removed, only be reauctioned to someone else.