Sourav Ganguly and V. V. S. Laxman will have to make a choice between their roles in the Cricket Advisory Committee and Indian Premier League franchises, according to BCCI Ethics Officer D. K. Jain.
The twin role taken up by the two players amounts to conflict of interest, Jain declared on Thursday.
While Laxman is a mentor for Sunrisers Hyderabad, Ganguly holds the same position with the Delhi Capitals franchise. Ganguly is also the president of the Cricket Association of Bengal.
The order on Laxman came on Thursday while the one on Ganguly had been passed earlier. “One-person-one-post is the soul of Lodha committee recommendations. I have just tried to bring it out. In [Sachin Tendulkar’s case], the conflict of interest did not arise as he had withdrawn from CAC. But it does in Ganguly and Laxman’s case and they need to decide how they would like to serve Indian cricket going forward,” Jain told PTI .
Read | Conflict of Interest charge against Tendulkar dismissed
Tendulkar is a mentor for Mumbai Indians, another IPL franchise.
All the three former Indian cricketers had contested the allegation of conflict of interest and Laxman had even offered to step down from the CAC during his deposition. “I have not done anything extraordinary while passing the order on Ganguly and Laxman,” Jain said.
Read | Shastri and support staff to get 45-day extension after World Cup
Jain, who was appointed by the Supreme Court in February, also commented on the commentary roles taken up by active players such as Robin Uthappa and Irfan Pathan doing commentary. According to him, going purely by the spirit of Lodha recommendations, these, too, could be considered conflict of interest.
“Based on this order there could be complaints against active players also. They can now apply their mind and be ready for that situation. I have not barred anybody [from commentating]. I have only decided what Conflict of Interest means as per the BCCI constitution. It is for the players to think whether it applies to them or not. It is the first time I have examined the rules and have given my interpretation [in the order], I don’t know if it would be accepted by the Board. If someone wants to challenge it he can challenge it,” he said.