Srinivasan,Raj Kundra named in IPL scandal report

[bulbul]

People on this thread talking about hurry haste and crucification :hysterical:

And no am not talking about different people belonging to a community having different views at different times - its an individual having near diametrical views on similar topics at different points in time - what sort of people are we dealing with here :hysterical:

Does the way I express my opinions bother someone - this is a fecking laugh riot is this bunch on here :hysterical:

Plz do not use this thread for philosophy

[StriKe]

No everything would be fresh just like it happened with SRH.Players will go in auction pool too

SRH was given the option RO keep all the players Deccan chargers had. Only ones they didn't want to retain went into auction pool

It will be up to the new owners If they want to keep the name brand and players they can keep them

Phew :aha: Hope they do it

Dhoni will buy CSK :--D

Some team are planning to buy Dhoni :nervous:

[Crookbond]

Not in hurry ' date=' but Seeni's conflict of interest is the most notable. All other CoI is start only after top guy.I dont think there is any other big CoI in Indian cricket than BCCI office bearer [at that time'] owning a IPL franchise. My concern with SC is how they bring points at different times? most of these things can be done parallaly not in series.

It can't be done in parallel because the case is just a single one. Soon, everyone will be crying judicial overreach

[Crookbond]

PTI_News: SC asks BCCI to give a list of administrators and players having commercial interest in IPL and Champions League.

[bulbul]

Tightening the noose around the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), the Supreme Court said on Tuesday that rules of the BCCI are not sacrosanct and cricket projects in the country won't collapse with the exit of a team in the IPL spot-fixing case. Clamping down on the IPL franchise Chennai Super Kings and its owner N Srinivasan, the SC said "purity of the game" is paramount, and it will do anything, including striking down rule 6.2.4 of the BCCI's Constitution, to keep cricket clean.

"BCCI needs to take it out of their minds that SC can't adjudicate on BCCI rules. Those aren't sacrosanct for us. You have to satisfy us as far as Rule 6.2.4 is concerned," the SC said on Tuesday.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/cricketnext/bcci-rules-arent-sacrosanct-exit-of-a-team-wont-collapse-projects-sc/518400-78.html

[StriKe]

Express Sports @IExpressSports · 1m 1 minute ago JUST IN: Gavaskar, Ganguly, Srikkanth in BCCI's list of people with conflict of interest, claim reports #IPLSpotFixing

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Express Sports @IExpressSports · 1m 1 minute ago JUST IN: Gavaskar, Ganguly, Srikkanth in BCCI's list of people with conflict of interest, claim reports #IPLSpotFixing

TIMES NOW ‏@timesnow 8m8 minutes ago Citing Srikant's example as he was selector & held posts with Chennai IPL team,SC asks BCCI how a selector can hold 2 posts #IPLCleanBowled BCCI digging its own grave!:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[Precambrian]

TIMES NOW ‏@timesnow 8m8 minutes ago Citing Srikant's example as he was selector & held posts with Chennai IPL team,SC asks BCCI how a selector can hold 2 posts #IPLCleanBowled BCCI digging its own grave!:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

Ultra rubbish. Can SC provide proofs that Srikanth misused that to his advantage? If not sod off. The naivety and hunt for brownie points by the judges is just astounding.

[Old guy]

Ultra rubbish. Can SC provide proofs that Srikanth misused that to his advantage? If not sod off. The naivety and hunt for brownie points by the judges is just astounding.

Actually bcci is saying that :giggle:

[bulbul]

Ultra rubbish. Can SC provide proofs that Srikanth misused that to his advantage? If not sod off. The naivety and hunt for brownie points by the judges is just astounding.

What proof? CoI is not tolerated in any organization.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Ultra rubbish. Can SC provide proofs that Srikanth misused that to his advantage? If not sod off. The naivety and hunt for brownie points by the judges is just astounding.

The SC doesnt need to prove anything.People need to prove to the SC. It doesnt matter how frustrated you grow.The SC is doing its job.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Actually bcci is saying that :giggle:

The frustration of Srini fans and their effort to defend him is nauseating.

[Precambrian]

What proof? CoI is not tolerated in any organization.

Occupying two positions isn't exactly cos, unless it can be proved that arms length basis was not followed.

[Precambrian]

Actually bcci is saying that :giggle:

Yes Bcci is showing that it is commonplace, not that it's occurrence suggests anything wrong.

[asterix]

Occupying two positions isn't exactly cos' date=' unless it can be proved that arms length basis was not followed.[/quote'] Maybe. But why BCCI is giving Srikkanth's example as COI to SC?

[Old guy]

Yes Bcci is showing that it is commonplace' date=' not that it's occurrence suggests anything wrong.[/quote'] Common place in their organisation not everywhere ...conflict of interest simply means that interest you do not even have to prove if anything was done ...which in many cases here was done and u will see in future more examples of it

[bulbul]

Occupying two positions isn't exactly cos' date=' unless it can be proved that arms length basis was not followed.[/quote'] I don't know about where you work , but where i work it's not allowed to use close relatives for any contractual work. Doesn't matter whether i involved directly in the work or not. CoI is somewhat similar to Insider trading.

[Crookbond]

Yes Bcci is showing that it is commonplace' date=' not that it's occurrence suggests anything wrong.[/quote'] Just because it's common place it doesn't make it right.

[Crookbond]

Maybe. But why BCCI is giving Srikkanth's example as COI to SC?

To show that everyone does it, so it's fine. It's a stupid argument as usual

[bulbul]

To show that everyone does it' date=' so it's fine. It's a stupid argument as usual[/quote'] They made same argument last week as well, don't know why SC is dragging this issue. Also its difficult to imagine Sibal is dumb to think the CoI of former players and BCCI chief are same. Surely court will not consider all cases as same. Is there any detail where BCCI told what kind of CoI these ex-players have?