The allegations of conflict against Kapil underscore he is part of the steering committee on the newly formed Indian Cricketers Association
Does the Kapil Dev-led Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC), which will pick the head coach for the Indian men’s team, suffer from conflict of interest? This question has been posed both internally within the BCCI as well as through an external complainant. Justice DK Jain, the ombudsman-cum-ethics officer of the board, has been asked to take the final call before the CAC sits down to shortlist the applicants and conduct the interviews to pick the coach.
ESPNcricinfo understands the conflict-of-interest issue was first flagged internally by former India women’s captain Diana Edulji, one of the three members on the Committee of Administrators (CoA), which has been the supervisory authority of the BCCI since 2017. At a recent CoA meeting, held in Delhi on July 26, Edulji said that the CAC could not be convened until all three members – Kapil, Anshuman Gaekwad and Shanta Rangaswamy – submit a written undertaking about them suffering from no conflict.
The CoA was forced to discuss the issue after Sanjeev Gupta, a life member with the Madhya Pradesh Cricket Association (MPCA), wrote to the CoA, pointing out that the Kapil-led CAC could not take seat because all three members fell foul of the conflict rule within the BCCI constitution, which states one person can hold just one post in Indian cricket.
The allegations of conflict against Kapil underscore he is part of the steering committee on the newly formed Indian Cricketers Association (ICA) where he is also one of directors. Incidentally, the ICA is funded by the BCCI. Kapil, who led India to 1983 World Cup title, also works as a cricket expert for Indian television channels. As for Gaekwad, the former India head coach, it is alleged in addition to working as a pundit on television channels, he is also part of the BCCI’s Member Affiliation Committee, a sub-committee of the board, which grants membership to state associations. Gaekwad, too, is part of the ICA’s steering group, as is Rangaswamy, who is also an ICA director.
It is understood that all three panelists on the Kapil-led CAC have not yet sent a no-conflict notice to the CoA. Once they come in, the CoA will send it to Justice Jain. It remains unclear whether the CoA will await the clearance from Justice Jain before asking the CAC to conduct the interviews and submit their final pick, which was expected to be wrapped up by mid-August.
Although the CoA appointed the CAC to pick the new coaching staff, Gupta has said the panel did not have the powers as only an elected BCCI administration was qualified to do so. Although Gupta was not available for a comment, reportedly he has written to the board’s ethics officer, stating it was unconstitutional for the CoA to appoint the CAC.
Incidentally, Gupta had filed a similar charge against two members of the previous CAC – Sachin Tendulkar and VVS Laxman – which Justice Jain upheld.
While Tendulkar decided to not be part of any BCCI committee, including the CAC, Laxman was asked by Justice Jain to choose one of the different roles he was performing in Indian cricket, which included being a commentator, being part of the CAC as well as being a mentor with the IPL franchise Sunrisers Hyderabad. Also asked to make a choice was Sourav Ganguly, who does commentary in addition to serving as the president of Cricket Association of Bengal and advisor to the Delhi Capitals franchise.
Source: ESPN Crickinfo