Jump to content
Rajiv

Gavaskar Fired......not yet!

Recommended Posts

Guest HariSampath
Sure can...they can fire him....Gavaskar is an employee of ICC and if he is in violation of ICC protocol, his a$$ can be fired quicker than a 22mil from a hand-gun.
Gavaskar is NOT an employee of the ICC. If there is ANY employment/contract involved anywhere in the world, then it is a legal relationship, and conflicts of interests are NOT arbitrary issues to be unilaterally defined by any company at any time with no notice to the employee. This "logic" itself shows how much the poster is intellectually challenged. Actions regarding "conflicts of interest" have NO bearing in any court of law in any country unless and until they have been defined, written in black and white. An employee of any company can challenge the company and sue it if the company suddenly says the employee has been acting in conflict with his company. expressing a contrary opinion/management policy of a company publicly is identifiable with personal rights and employee rights and unless this action can be in violation of previously signed contracts AND results in the company suffering directly as a result of those actions, no conflict is said to have been established by due law. The above can be seen routinely in every country , each day, in companies, unions, factories, Govt institutions, policy bodies, governments, parliaments and even media. Employees routinely criticie functioning of management of companies while remaining part of management. Corporate executives routinely criticise the management of parent corporations in the media, members of parliament routinely criticise political parties they belong to and the governments they are part of, the world over. In sport, players criticise administrators, administrators criticise cricketers, everyone in the admn critice selectors, selection policies, anything and everything about any sport is routinely criticised by sport administrators within that body, and publicly too. This is NOTHING new. When even employees have such rights , and there can be no "conflict of interest", what to say of a non employee , an appointee like Gavaskar whose media commitments were existent when ICC appointed him. Is the "conflict" merely Sunny's current comments ? Or is the conflict referring to Sunny's media job itself. Here again, Sunny is an EMPLOYEE of ESPN-Star..NOT of ICC, he was ESPN employee BEFORE he was into ICC, and if ICC thought that was okay then, how can there be any conflict now ? If in any doubt about the above, try www.google.com
Link to post
Guest HariSampath
India was the first to win a major world ODI tournament IN AUS.
FALSE! Pakistan won the world cup in Australia in 92
This shows how ill informed you are ( for others, of course I know) India won the World Championship of cricket in Australia 1985 , a Major ODI tournament , AND this was before Australia had won a single major ODI world tournament, by that time India had already won TWO world ODI tournaments with Aus yet to open its account
Link to post
Guest HariSampath
I suggest you get better educated in English....for single quotations imply paraphrasing,not quoting. But i suppose a half-literate insecure fool like you will try to hide your inadequate comprehension yet again by calling it 'semantics'. I warn you- don't try wordplay with me...you are nowhere as skilled or learned enough to get anywhere against me in this medium of instruction.
To understand your views can be described as floccipaucinihilipilification
Link to post
I suggest you get better educated in English....for single quotations imply paraphrasing,not quoting. But i suppose a half-literate insecure fool like you will try to hide your inadequate comprehension yet again by calling it 'semantics'. I warn you- don't try wordplay with me...you are nowhere as skilled or learned enough to get anywhere against me in this medium of instruction.
Let's get back to the argument instead of hurling jibes about, CC.
Link to post
Gavaskar is NOT an employee of the ICC
He most certainly is if he is holding a post with the ICC.
If there is ANY employment/contract involved anywhere in the world, then it is a legal relationship, and conflicts of interests are NOT arbitrary issues to be unilaterally defined by any company at any time with no notice to the employee.
False...and hey, i can bet you good money that Sunny will not win if he contests ICC's position on his breach of ethics.
Actions regarding "conflicts of interest" have NO bearing in any court of law in any country unless and until they have been defined, written in black and white.
Utterly false. Conflict of interest does NOT need to be defined, it is construed and has been so in numerous cases.
An employee of any company can challenge the company and sue it if the company suddenly says the employee has been acting in conflict with his company. expressing a contrary opinion/management policy of a company publicly is identifiable with personal rights and employee rights and unless this action can be in violation of previously signed contracts AND results in the company suffering directly as a result of those actions, no conflict is said to have been established by due law.
False. It does not have to be a singned contract. If the company has a policy that is stated and you are an employee, you are expected to respect it or get your a$$ fired.
if ICC thought that was okay then, how can there be any conflict now ?
Its simple, vatz. If i hire you, knowing that you hold a job with a rival company, i can still fire you for yapping about your job/treatment in my company. In other words, conflict of interest is not just the post, but also the actions of the person!
India won the World Championship of cricket in Australia 1985 , a Major ODI tournament , AND this was before Australia had won a single major ODI world tournament, by that time India had already won TWO world ODI tournaments with Aus yet to open its account
Touche. Still doesn't change the FACT that Australia is the dominant #1 team today, has been for 10 years and has accomplished FAR FAR more in cricket than India has in most of their concurrent existence.
To understand your views can be described as floccipaucinihilipilification
Perhaps, but your pussilanimous vacillations won't get very far with me, pup.. I have already exposed you for misquoting me, kindly don't try that again. And again, i agree 100% with ICC giving Gavaskar an ultimatum....Gavaskar's vitriolic attack on his own employer ICC merits his instant termination, particularly since he is making racial references in his vitriolic attack.
Link to post
I suggest you get better educated in English....for single quotations imply paraphrasing,not quoting. But i suppose a half-literate insecure fool like you will try to hide your inadequate comprehension yet again by calling it 'semantics'. I warn you- don't try wordplay with me...you are nowhere as skilled or learned enough to get anywhere against me in this medium of instruction.
You would never post like that against a gora! Sunny being fired would be a disgrace!
Link to post
You would never post like that against a gora!
[edited] This is nothing but hyperventilations and further exposure of your racist mindset, given that you drag in the race card like a cissy in each and every discussion for a cop-out/whip up frenzy.
Sunny being fired would be a disgrace!
it would be a disgrace for a company not to fire a retard who accuses the company of racism without hard evidence. Since Sunny is so convinced that Aussie/English have ruled the cricketing world unfairly and at the expense of brown people, let him produce one SHRED of hard evidence to corroborrate his viewpoint instead of just making headlines by fanning the flames of insecurity that he has.
Link to post
I suggest you get better educated in English....for single quotations imply paraphrasing,not quoting. But i suppose a half-literate insecure fool like you will try to hide your inadequate comprehension yet again by calling it 'semantics'. I warn you- don't try wordplay with me...you are nowhere as skilled or learned enough to get anywhere against me in this medium of instruction.
:hysterical::hysterical:No one abuses a poster with as much style as CC:hysterical::hysterical:
Link to post
Guest HariSampath
He most certainly is if he is holding a post with the ICC.
No, he is not an employee as you repeatedly and foolishly but not surprisingly assert, and holding a post maketh not an employee. I am a techno consultant with Standard and Poor, paid for my services and and it is an official position, but I am NOT an employee of S & P. The very term "employee" explicitly defines that the person cannot be simultaneously holding an identical legal contractual position with another company. For eg, Gavaskar is an employee of ESPN Star, he has a legal contract, but even though he writes for Indian newspapers, he is NOT their employee, he is just engaged and paid for his writing. Writing for Hindustan Times doesn't mean Gavaskar has no right to criticise the editorial content of HT regarding India's foreign policy in the middle east. The same cannot be cited as cause for terminating Gavaskar as a columnist on cricket with HT. Employee/employer relationships are never ambiguous and are clearly defined at the time of employment. Potential employees are always informed of existing conflicts with policy, are required to sign legal contracts that include company's policies stated upfront. Once the contract is signed, that is the gospel in determining whether or not an employee has flouted it. If at the time of contract signing, the existent employment elsewhere ( like media in the case of Sunny) has been taken into account and NOT seen as a barrier to the new contract to be signed, it cannot be said to be conflicting at a later date. Acceptance of existing media employment means accepting whatever job responsibilities such an employment may entail ( accepted by ICC at time of signing, bu the signing process itself)
False...and hey, i can bet you good money that Sunny will not win if he contests ICC's position on his breach of ethics.
Dont even try...IF according to you, Gavaskar is an employee of ICC, then the legal position of the existing contract alone will be the legal decider. See above on what will happen if ICC says the employee has flouted contract and acted in conflict of ICC interests ( and more so when "interests are not defined, "conflict" cannot be defined too. Again, the legal process would involve defining "ICC interests", defining " Gavaskar's interests", and then legally establishing that Gavaskar had in writing, legally agreed to these at the time of accepting contract, and THEN establishing that Gavaskar's actions were in pursuant of his own interests ( as legally established) and that those actions were "in conflict " with the ICC interests as defined by the contract at the time of signing. Furthermore, a contract is a legal agreement between two entities and in this case, IF Gavaskar wre to be fired as an employee ( which he is NOT), then he can haul ICC over hot coals ( not unlike me doing it to you now). I would give you so many citations from the International court of justice in The Hague, but what is the use, I shall wait for you to graduate High school
Utterly false. Conflict of interest does NOT need to be defined, it is construed and has been so in numerous cases.
Interests have to be defined...then conflict has to be established...see above.
False. It does not have to be a singned contract. If the company has a policy that is stated and you are an employee, you are expected to respect it or get your a$$ fired.
Policy has to be stated , in writing at the time of employment/any professional relationship. If you have had the opportunity to deal with contracts, maybe you would understand, but to expect that would be an exercise in futility.
Its simple, vatz. If i hire you, knowing that you hold a job with a rival company, i can still fire you for yapping about your job/treatment in my company. In other words, conflict of interest is not just the post, but also the actions of the person!
If you do the above, then you would be the fool here and YOU would be the one who the company fires first for hiring me depite knowing I am employed with a rival company. For starters start learning about basic corporate practices, no compete clauses, potential evolution of interests of either side post contract signing, dynamic arbitrations of non convergent interests, ad hoc definitions of interests divergence et al...but again, you would need to graduate high school before learning such complexities of International corporate practices.
Link to post
Guest HariSampath
it would be a disgrace for a company not to fire a retard who accuses the company of racism without hard evidence.
Again, you are exposing your lack of intellectual/legal capacity . Nowhere has Gavaskar called ICC racist. Gavaskar had alluded to the fact that Mike Procter , another individual employed by the ICC had been possibly racist in his evaluation. I may be employed by a company, but I still have the right to criticise any other employee's behavior, and still not be criticising the employer itself. There is a subtle but highly significant legal issue in this, which obviously you cannot grasp.
Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...