You're doing your thing again where you insert incomparable analogies. There is a lot of difference between allowing a person with a proven track record like Dawood to bid for a team and allowing an unproven entity like Meiyappan to do the same.
No, it isn't. It is extremely relevant to know what the post entails. The rules of the IPL clearly mandate the termination of a franchise when an owner engages in betting. If a 'team principal' is not an owner, one doesn't have a case for the termination of CSK. If it's proven that Meiyappan was an owner, CSK is finished. If Meiyappan was not an owner, but it's proven that his activities were known to the owners and they failed to act on it, they'd be guilty of being accesories and CSK is finished. If Meiyappan isn't an owner and it turns out that 'team principal' is merely an employee of the franchise, albeit a high ranking one, CSK cannot be held guilty of any wrong doing. You don't terminate a company because an employee happened to be corrupt.
The analogies are not fully incomparable or you can use any unknown/undercover criminal instead of Dawood. And the IPL rules state that anyonepart of the management/ownership/holding company IIRC. There's a difference there.
Or if you are being argumentative then Raj Kundra will deny having bet on matches too and the rest will claim he has only 11 percent stage. Why should the majority shareholders be punished for what allegedly a friend of 11 percent stake holder in Kundra (Goenka) was doing.
Atleast, there's a registered case in this. There they don't even have evidence enough to do that and get custody. You can make a argument for anything like this and set up "probe panels" conveniently.
Congratulations to the concerned people of the country for taking a mere five years to come to this realization. Srinivasan's conflict of interest seems to have been a well kept secret, and it has required a scandal involving a person not named Srinivasan, in the sixth year of operations, for the people to demand Srinivasan's resignation.
And what exactly are these moral issues that Srinivasan is supposed to have? I sure as hell would be pissed off if I were innocent of any wrong doing and yet people demanded that I resign from my post for the sins of my son in law. You've got to prove that Srinivasan was in the know. Is there even the tiniest shred of evidence to suggest that this was so? If you think the conflict of interest he has with his ownership of CSK is a moral issue, were you guys in hibernation for all these years? Why demand his resignation now? Clearly you people find the Meiyappan angle relevant, you're using it as a trigger, and you're confusing yourselves by linking the two issues together. You guys have a muddled thought process atm. You're all operating out of a blind sense of moral outrage. You just want someone to pay, and Srinivasan has always looked a delicious target. Let the law run it's course. If it finds a link between Meiyappan's betting and Srinivasan, kick him out. If it doesn't, hound the strangely quiet Sharad Pawar and his buddies for tweaking the rules and allowing him to own a franchise.
There's been outrage over his conflict of interest for a long while now, but BCCI being BCCI there's not much you can do except outrage. Now that the same conflict of interest has gotten things to a head, the outrage has increased.
Don't get what is the argument here anyway ? He had conflict of interest owning a team. Now the management of that team which he was owning and allegedly allowing his son in law priviledges too, has gotten into trouble.
Just because there was less outrage before, does by no means mean that he should be let off the hook now. And yes, Pawar is to be blamed for allowing this too but there are 2 parts of this charge -
1) Having a conflict of interest and owning a team while keeping all top BCCI posts.
2) Being a owner of a CSK, and allegedly allowing son in law to run his team and have priviledged access as team principal which was used for illegal activities.
Pawar, if anything was involved in 1 but not in 2. Yes, obviously he needs to be blamed too but how does it exonerate the main person i.e Srini ?
Why is there no internal investigation into the role played by Shukla in the affair? Was he aware of these happenings and chose to overlook them, or was he incompetent? Would you not want to investigate the role of the IPL commissioner to (a) fix culpability, and (b) see what lessons could be learnt to prevent any similar future occurrences? Why do people treat a resignation as the end of the matter? It's the lazy way out.
So according to you the commissioner should be aware of someone fixing manages or betting in a individual capacity, but the direct team owner can be let off ? Ok.
Yes, lessons need to be learned for future occurences and Shukla to be blamed too but he has resigned already, while the demand so far has been for Srinivasan't resignation too as the first step. It's not the end of the matter but until he resigns the probe panel can't be expected to function freely and BCCI to act fairly on his team.
I ask again what action you want to take against Shukla ? And Srinivasan by the same logic and for a more severe involvement ? Specify please instead of generalities.
And Resignation is not the end of the matter, but it is a start which is why Srinivasan is clinging on desperately with Fevicol though now he has to share his seat.
Then there's also the treasurer, the esteemed Mr. Shirke, who's made a grand show of moral outrage by resigning. One would assume that the treasurer would possess knowledge of the holding patterns of the various franchises. Why was he silent all this while if there was a conflict of interest with Srinivasan, and why hasn't he cleared the air about the exact nature of Meiyappan's role in CSK? Nah, it's far more convenient to grandstand and resign and hide from the public glare, isn't it? Cowards, the whole lot of them.
Huh ? It's not the treasurer's job to clear the air about anyone's role in CSK out of the blue. He was clearly considered in the list of owners at first.
And having a conflict of interest was immoral but the whole world was aware of it. You are really stretching the argument here.
Besides even if we take your argument which is blame x, y. z etc... too. It in no way exonerates Srinivasan. So not sure how that is a defence for him ? And if it is, then it's a very weak one.
Edit - Also the important question, will CSK register a case against Meiyappan as it will be very hard to press any charges against him outside of Gambling without CSK who is the affected party here registering a case ?
Rajasthan Royals has done so against his players. Why the reluctance from CSK to do so against Meiyappan ? Slap harsh charges of fraud and cheating against him if he was contracted and also charges of trespassing and getting illegal access to info as per your argument if he wasn't. What's stopping them ? Please do tell.
