Srinivasan should go now.

[Mariyam]

You mean the issue which went to the US Supreme court and the court itself said it was not illegal. He wanted to retain Dhoni cause of the TINA factor. Regarding corruption, you can't run a business in India unless you are corrupt. The part about how he doesn't care about Cricket development in India is all BS. He is as interested as the guy before him or the guy after him. Don't tell me he is any worse than Sharad Pawar in this regard. So it basically comes down to personal dislike and hate for whatever reason, some of which is regional.

US supreme court? Yoda (and Detonator, to a lesser extent), you're justifying the indefensible here. I don't know the details of the US Supreme Court case that you mention. I'll give you a much closer to home example. Some years ago, the firm I was with was litigating in a case roughly along the same lines; viz conflict of interest. An Erstwhile director of GAIL also was a stake holder in a condenser/compressor manufacturing enterprise. His stake was marginal- to the tune of 6.5% or so. GAIL had floated a tendor for some 4000 condensers of a certain kind, and it was the Director's enterprise which won the contract. One of the applicants in the tendor, who is a major player in the condenser market filed a case, and the HC couldn't find any evidence that the tendor was awarded on any reasons other than merit or even any evidence that any inside information was passed which helped that particular enterprise win the bid. Yet the HC ruled against the Director, and it is a landmark ruling, simply because there was a possibility that such kind of 'fixing' could have happened. They ordered that the bids be re-evaluated and the said enterprise's bid be disqualified. And Srini's case is a lot more stark as he is a majority stakeholder in the CSK franchise. I'm not insinuating that he's fixed things to suit CSK or tried widen his clout within the BCCI using the CSK franchise for leverage. But that is certainly a possibility, and can't be discounted. The ethical thing to do (work wise) to give up one post. Lets not trivialize the issue by making it a Tamil vs Non Tamil, or a regional thing. It simply isn't. Most people who are against Srini now, were against Sharad Pawar for the same reason too.

[Crookbond]

US supreme court? Yoda (and Detonator, to a lesser extent), you're justifying the indefensible here. I don't know the details of the US Supreme Court case that you mention. I'll give you a much closer to home example. Some years ago, the firm I was with was litigating in a case roughly along the same lines; viz conflict of interest. An Erstwhile director of GAIL also was a stake holder in a condenser/compressor manufacturing enterprise. His stake was marginal- to the tune of 6.5% or so. GAIL had floated a tendor for some 4000 condensers of a certain kind, and it was the Director's enterprise which won the contract. One of the applicants in the tendor, who is a major player in the condenser market filed a case, and the HC couldn't find any evidence that the tendor was awarded on any reasons other than merit or even any evidence that any inside information was passed which helped that particular enterprise win the bid. Yet the HC ruled against the Director, and it is a landmark ruling, simply because there was a possibility that such kind of 'fixing' could have happened. They ordered that the bids be re-evaluated and the said enterprise's bid be disqualified. And Srini's case is a lot more stark as he is a majority stakeholder in the CSK franchise. I'm not insinuating that he's fixed things to suit CSK or tried widen his clout within the BCCI using the CSK franchise for leverage. But that is certainly a possibility, and can't be discounted. The ethical thing to do (work wise) to give up one post. Lets not trivialize the issue by making it a Tamil vs Non Tamil, or a regional thing. It simply isn't. Most people who are against Srini now, were against Sharad Pawar for the same reason too.

The problem starts when the accusers use regional overtones to make their statements and sometimes pursue vested interested. While some posters are defending the indefensible, the kind of comments made by the alleging crowd does border on a regionalist tone as well.

[Detonator]

US supreme court? Yoda (and Detonator, to a lesser extent), you're justifying the indefensible here. I don't know the details of the US Supreme Court case that you mention. I'll give you a much closer to home example. Some years ago, the firm I was with was litigating in a case roughly along the same lines; viz conflict of interest. An Erstwhile director of GAIL also was a stake holder in a condenser/compressor manufacturing enterprise. His stake was marginal- to the tune of 6.5% or so. GAIL had floated a tendor for some 4000 condensers of a certain kind, and it was the Director's enterprise which won the contract. One of the applicants in the tendor, who is a major player in the condenser market filed a case, and the HC couldn't find any evidence that the tendor was awarded on any reasons other than merit or even any evidence that any inside information was passed which helped that particular enterprise win the bid. Yet the HC ruled against the Director, and it is a landmark ruling, simply because there was a possibility that such kind of 'fixing' could have happened. They ordered that the bids be re-evaluated and the said enterprise's bid be disqualified. And Srini's case is a lot more stark as he is a majority stakeholder in the CSK franchise. I'm not insinuating that he's fixed things to suit CSK or tried widen his clout within the BCCI using the CSK franchise for leverage. But that is certainly a possibility, and can't be discounted. The ethical thing to do (work wise) to give up one post. Lets not trivialize the issue by making it a Tamil vs Non Tamil, or a regional thing. It simply isn't. Most people who are against Srini now, were against Sharad Pawar for the same reason too.

Makes a lot of sense .Couldn't agree more. As I already said his COI is not defendable. My biggest concern is, will his successor be any good? I hope he/she turns out to be a better person..

[yoda]

US supreme court? Yoda (and Detonator, to a lesser extent), you're justifying the indefensible here. I don't know the details of the US Supreme Court case that you mention. I'll give you a much closer to home example. Some years ago, the firm I was with was litigating in a case roughly along the same lines; viz conflict of interest.

My bad, being too long in the US, I meant Indian Supreme Court. We have discussed the N. Srini conflict of interest issue before. It did go to the Indian Supreme Court and the ruling was that it was not illegal. If that is not acceptable, then you have no respect for Indian laws.

[Detonator]

Oh please stop the BS - Badrinath is from TN. What other proof do you need?

I would say Sridharan Sharath. CI has a nice article sbout him..

[Mariyam]

My bad, being too long in the US, I meant Indian Supreme Court. We have discussed the N. Srini conflict of interest issue before. It did go to the Indian Supreme Court and the ruling was that it was not illegal. If that is not acceptable, then you have no respect for Indian laws.

Wasn't that SC's temporary ruling with a caveat: that the IPL and all other domestic T 20 domestic competitions should not be under the purview of the BCCI? And Srini has already reneged on that part. And I think there isn't a judgement on the case yet. What the SC has said is that till there is a judgement, Srini can continue.

[Number]

Wasn't that SC's temporary ruling with a caveat: that the IPL and all other domestic T 20 domestic competitions should not be under the purview of the BCCI? And Srini has already reneged on that part. And I think there isn't a judgement on the case yet. What the SC has said is that till there is a judgement, Srini can continue.

He is from Chennai, hence Yoda will come in between and play victim card. Anyone from Delhi here ? please defend Shuklaji too, racist people are attacking him without any reason.

[bulbul]

"IPL has not let down people, it is these dirty cricketers who have done this. No punishment is enough for them. If these dirty cricketers are found guilty, they should not be allowed to play anymore and should be sent to jail," said the BCCI chief. "I don't have to personally apologise, it's enough that I am condemning it," he said.

:rofl:

[diga]

He is from Chennai, hence Yoda will come in between and play victim card. .

Surely sivaramakrishnan in the commentary panel is a great example of selecting a deserving candidate :beee: i

[jalebi_bhai]

US supreme court? Yoda (and Detonator, to a lesser extent), you're justifying the indefensible here. I don't know the details of the US Supreme Court case that you mention. I'll give you a much closer to home example. Some years ago, the firm I was with was litigating in a case roughly along the same lines; viz conflict of interest. An Erstwhile director of GAIL also was a stake holder in a condenser/compressor manufacturing enterprise. His stake was marginal- to the tune of 6.5% or so. GAIL had floated a tendor for some 4000 condensers of a certain kind, and it was the Director's enterprise which won the contract. One of the applicants in the tendor, who is a major player in the condenser market filed a case, and the HC couldn't find any evidence that the tendor was awarded on any reasons other than merit or even any evidence that any inside information was passed which helped that particular enterprise win the bid. Yet the HC ruled against the Director, and it is a landmark ruling, simply because there was a possibility that such kind of 'fixing' could have happened. They ordered that the bids be re-evaluated and the said enterprise's bid be disqualified. And Srini's case is a lot more stark as he is a majority stakeholder in the CSK franchise. I'm not insinuating that he's fixed things to suit CSK or tried widen his clout within the BCCI using the CSK franchise for leverage. But that is certainly a possibility, and can't be discounted. The ethical thing to do (work wise) to give up one post. Lets not trivialize the issue by making it a Tamil vs Non Tamil, or a regional thing. It simply isn't. Most people who are against Srini now, were against Sharad Pawar for the same reason too.

Thing is.....Srini actually got the rules changed....he was BCCI secretary at the time..... BCCI changes its constitution In September 2008, after the first season of the IPL, the BCCI amended clause 6.2.4 of the regulations for players, team officials, umpires and administrators, which originally read: "No administrator shall have, directly or indirectly, any commercial interest in the matches and events conducted by the board." After the change, it read: "No administrator shall have directly or indirectly any commercial interest in any of the events of the BCCI, excluding IPL, Champions League and Twenty20." The change allowed N Srinivasan, then treasurer of the board, to own an IPL franchise - he is also managing director of India Cements, the owner of the Chennai Super Kings. Srinivasan had been in violation of the board's regulations until the change was made. The matter is now the subject of a petition filed by former BCCI president AC Muthiah, who has questioned the motives behind the amendment. The case is still before the Supreme Court, but in a split decision last year, Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra said Srinivasan should have stepped down from the BCCI until the case was settled. http://sports.ndtv.com/cricket/features/specials/185125-indian-premier-league-shifting-goalposts-to-serve-its-needs And it's not CSK alone.....all the franchises have done some hera-pheri somewhere down the line....only CSK have been the most guilty party....closely followed by MI.... What the IPL needs is transparency....and if it means getting rid of Srini or anyone for that matter.....then so be it.....

[Sachin=GOD]

Question their interest in this time of conflict

N Srinivasan sits in the president's chair at the Indian cricket board office; he's also the vice-chairman and managing director of India Cements, apart from owning the Chennai Super Kings. Mahendra Singh Dhoni is the India captain, the CSK captain, employed with the India Cements and owns a player management firm, Rhiti Sports Management. Anil Kumble is the president of the Karnataka State Cricket Association, heads the Mumbai Indians team management and also owns a player management firm. Earlier, he was the mentor of the Royal Challengers Bangalore (RCB). Recent phenomenon Ever since the advent of the cash-rich Twenty20 league, Indian cricket has been besieged by a host of issues, conflict of interest is one of them. As president, Srinivasan's main responsibility is defending the interest of the board at all costs. By associating himself with the T20 league as a franchisee owner, public perception is that he would not be able do a fair job. Every time there is a controversy in Indian cricket, naturally, aspersions are cast on his ability to ensure justice, and questions raised on his personal interests. As the spot-fixing controversy spiraled out of control, on Friday, Srinivasan was again at a loss of words to defend himself when the issue was brought up by the Headlines Today anchor. "What is a conflict of interest? There is no vested interest in the BCCI, there will be no cover-up (on spot-fixing)," was Srinivasan's unconvincing reply. Despite his claims of not allowing his personal interests to interfere, there are examples to the contrary. A national selector and former India star alleged that he had gone out of his way to save Dhoni from being sacked as India captain. The CSK angle again? When occupying two positions, it's important to keep your decisions independent of each other. On this front, even Dhoni hasn't been able to save himself a lot of times from the public perception of the conflict of interest by wearing too many hats while being India captain. He's the highest grosser in Indian sport and he still indulges in the business of player management, where he's signed some of his teammates, leaves him vulnerable to prying eyes. Kumble's googly In Kumble's case, he had a clean image as a cricketer and helped India tide over the match-fixing scandal that rocked the cricket world in 2000. The country's anti-corruption officials say: "Along with Dravid and Srinath, he is the cleanest guy in India cricket. There is not even a want for this kind of money." But, the role of KSCA president comes with responsibility, much more than his job in the league. He cannot be seen negotiating with players for a particular franchisee, especially from his own state.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Cricket/cricketnews/Question-their-interest-in-this-time-of-conflict/Article1-1062426.aspx

[saneindian]

He is from Chennai, hence Yoda will come in between and play victim card. Anyone from Delhi here ? please defend Shuklaji too, racist people are attacking him without any reason.

Motu Shuklaji is a Kanpuriya. S_G or Outy should defend him :P

[Sachin=GOD]

Motu Shuklaji is a Kanpuriya. S_G or Outy should defend him :P

he is also a Kangressi :P

[bulbul]

he is also a Kangressi :P

List is narrowed down :P

[superstar]

Srini is the kohinoor of south. All southies join together to save the maan and mariyada of our greatest son. Shukla is hiding and our man is taking all the brick bats.

[bulbul]

Srini is the kohinoor of south. All southies join together to save the maan and mariyada of our greatest son. Shukla is hiding and our man is taking all the brick bats.

Yep lets all of us send lungi's to so that we can save his mariyada :two_thumbs_up:

[G_B_]

the real question is, is there anything legally stopping Srinivasan from holding two posts? One as majority shareholder in the CSK franchise and the other as BCCI president? From what i gather both Pawar and Manohar were president of their respective state boards in addition to being BCCI president. Fundamentally there is a conflict of interest in the way BCCI works. Atleast on paper. The answer me thinks is no. Ethically and morally he should not. But legally he appears to be safe. Conflict of interest is rife in India. Srinivasan is hardly the only one to actually have the same moral dilemma. Look at ESPN cricinfo. They keep a flow of anti IPL articles (yet ironically covering the matches) because their parent company Star cricket holds the rights for team India over competitor Sony who hold the IPL. For me atleast there is a moral conflict of interest right there.

[superstar]

Wow srini lying to save Shukla and Jaitley who missed the meeting. Respect for the baron.

[bulbul]

the real question is, is there anything legally stopping Srinivasan from holding two posts? One as majority shareholder in the CSK franchise and the other as BCCI president? From what i gather both Pawar and Manohar were president of their respective state boards in addition to being BCCI president. Fundamentally there is a conflict of interest in the way BCCI works. Atleast on paper. The answer me thinks is no. Ethically and morally he should not. But legally he appears to be safe. Conflict of interest is rife in India. Srinivasan is hardly the only one to actually have the same moral dilemma. Look at ESPN cricinfo. They keep a flow of anti IPL articles (yet ironically covering the matches) because their parent company Star cricket holds the rights for team India over competitor Sony who hold the IPL. For me atleast there is a moral conflict of interest right there.

Rule was changed for him.:giggle:

[superstar]

Srini spreading tamil on National media. Even more respect for him.