BCCI Wants Ranatunga Dropped

[SJS]

Considering Ranatunga basically extorted $70 million off the BCCI, I don't see how the BCCI aren't within their rights to demand his ouster. Why would you rather BCCI behave like a sulking woman by keeping quiet and witholding their offer? That approach wouldn't benefit Sri Lanka at all.

Did he do it in his personal capacity ?

 

[G.I.Joe]

Did he do it in his personal capacity ?

A fancy title makes it the right thing to do?

 

[SJS]

A fancy title makes it the right thing to do?

You still haven't answered the question. Let me add another one.

1. Who is BCCI asking to sack Ranatunga? and as I asked before

2. Did Ranatunga act in his personal capacity when he, as you put it, extorted those 70 million USD off the BCCI?

 

[G.I.Joe]

You still haven't answered the question. Let me add another one.

1. Who is BCCI asking to sack Ranatunga? and as I asked before

2. Did Ranatunga act in his personal capacity when he, as you put it, extorted those 70 million USD off the BCCI?

Please read my last post again. Fancy titles and diplomatic proprieties aren't an excuse.

 

[SJS]

Please read my last post again. Fancy titles and diplomatic proprieties aren't an excuse.

I am afraid I cant proceed with this since you are not going to answer what I asked.

Ciao.

 

[G.I.Joe]

I am afraid I cant proceed with this since you are not going to answer what I asked.

Ciao.

Sorry, but your style of dialogue isn't one I encourage either on forums or in real life. You could simply state your piece and engage in conversation or keep on with the annoying interrogation which I'm not going to be part of.

 

[SJS]

Sorry, but your style of dialogue isn't one I encourage either on forums or in real life. You could simply state your piece and engage in conversation or keep on with the annoying interrogation which I'm not going to be part of.

I am sorry if thats what it sounded like to you. It was not my intention.

I find that when one states one's point in a dertailed and, what one believes is, a coherent and well laid out opinion, often you get a reply which concentrates on something else or takes just a phrase or a sentence in your long post and then starts a war of semantics where the argument or debate is lost. So I was just trying to bring it back, through those two questions, to what I said originally. If you have read my posts before you may find that I do not get into prolonged debates fighting over words and sentences. I find that pointless and merely an excercise to have the last word. At 59 (almost) I am too old to get pleasure from that

Coming back to what I was trying to say. Let me answer it through those two questions.

Since BCCI wants Sri Lankan Board (whatever body or group of individuals that means) to sack Ranatunga we are implying that there is a body that has the power to sack Ranatunga. I assume that there is such a body and Ranatunga is not an emperor.

Now, we come to the other question. Was Ranatunga acting in his personal capacity.

If Ranatunga takes any action that involves a decision taken by him on behalf of the Sri Lankan Board, all it needs is for BCCI to address that decision and its implications vis-a-vis the interests of BCCI. Any decision taken by the CEO/President etc becomes a matter of policy for the organistaion and BCCI is certainly right to inform the Sri Lankan board of their comcerns and ask them to review (and change) that policy otherwise it will force BCCI to review (and change) certain policies of its own which, the Sri Lankan board will understand even without saying, wil hurt Sri Lankan interests.

Now this does everything that BCCI wants. It threatens the Sri Lankan Board that their will be consequences to decisions being taken on Sri Lanka's behalf (by whosoever may be the authorised person) and suggest that they revert those decisions.

Thats all that is required for Sri Lankan board to act if they are scared of the BCCI's 'threat' of what they might do. This does not involve asking them to sack any of their employees. It is the policy and the decision taken of behalf of Sri Lanka that needs to be addressed not the person under whose signature it came into being.

 

[Precambrian]

BCCI puts on hold all future bilateral series against Lanka

http://www.ptinews.com/pti\ptisite.nsf/0/D97D9E53F653341D652574EE0039CC81?OpenDocument

Karachi, Oct 26 (PTI) Miffed at the "hostile" statements from Sri Lanka Cricket officials against Indian Premier League, the BCCI has decided to put on hold India's all future bilateral series against Sri Lanka.
According to confidential documents obtained by PTI relating to a recent meeting between officials of the two boards, the Indians have made it clear that until the SLC changes its present hostile attitude towards BCCI, all tours by the Indian team in the FTP till 2012 stand unconfirmed.

Documents show that IPL Chairman Lalit Modi and other BCCI officials were extremely unhappy with some of the statements made by the Sri Lankan board officials particularly president Arjuna Ranatunga about the BCCI and Indian Premier League.

"Mr Modi and Mr (Niranjan) Shah were very puzzled and shocked at the attitude of Sri Lankan cricket towards the BCCI and had serious concerns with regards to some of the press statements which had been released by some SLC officials," the document stated.

"Further they were very curious to find out the hostile manner in which the SLC mentioned BCCI/IPL." The meeting was attended by Modi and other Indian board officials with a delegation of the Sri Lankan cricket board including Siddath Wettimuny.

The documents state that the Indian board had also decided to withdraw the USD 40 million bailout package offer to Sri Lankan cricket as they are not happy that the SLC chairman had decided to make public what was a confidential offer.

The Indian officials mentioned a damaging comment from Ranatunga in Dubai stating BCCI was trying to buy Sri Lankan cricket with the bailout package proposal. PTI

It just keeps getting better and better!!

 

[Richard]

 

[silentstriker]

Ranatunga is such an idiot.

 

[Precambrian]

Ranatunga is such an idiot.

Tried to do a Darrell Hair and ends up with more or less same consequences.

 

[Richard]

I think he actually tried to do a Ranatunga TBH. The same thing he himself had done in 1998/99. That was a battle where he was, essentially, in the right as well. However, he had the backing of those who mattered there; here, he doesn't.

Rantunga vs Emerson only had one winner. So does Ranatunga vs Modi\Pawar\Shah\etc. But it ain't the same person.

 

[social]

Fancy trying to do the right thing by your country - horrible behaviour by Ranatunga

 

[Richard]

It wasn't horrible behaviour, not at all. But it was unwise, and he's paid the price.

 

[social]

It wasn't horrible behaviour, not at all. But it was unwise, and he's paid the price.

I was being sarcastic Richard

Anyway, I hope Modi and his cronies eventually pay a price

They remind me of Japanese businessmen in the late 80s - people whose commercial success is totally out of all proportion with their level of competency

 

[silentstriker]

Fancy trying to do the right thing by your country - horrible behaviour by Ranatunga

He wasn't trying to do right by his country - that is the issue.

 

[social]

He wasn't trying to do right by his country - that is the issue.

Of course he was

Unfortunately, the whole thing has blown up because of the giant egoes involved

 

[silentstriker]

Of course he was

How so? How is it helping his country to publically critisize your biggest ally? The players in SL cricket don't even get paid regularly, and they have to go to other tournaments to make a living, and yet despite their objections, you schedule something outside the FTP and flaunt it in people's faces? Who exactly is he helping? How was he doing what was best for his country? Or make public a private offer of money that could save you for bankruptcy and then blame BCCI for trying to 'buy' SLC cricket.

I want to know what benefit SLC got or would have gotten from his actions, because I can't think of a single thing.

 

[Fusion]

How so? How is it helping his country to publically critisize your biggest ally? The players in SL cricket don't even get paid regularly, and they have to go to other tournaments to make a living, and yet despite their objections, you schedule something outside the FTP and flaunt it in people's faces? Who exactly is he helping? How was he doing what was best for his country? Or make public a private offer of money that could save you for bankruptcy and then blame BCCI for trying to 'buy' SLC cricket.

I want to know what benefit SLC got or would have gotten from his actions, because I can't think of a single thing.

Totally AWTA. I think Ranatunga's ego is so massive that he'd rather SL cricket be hurt than back down.

 

[Richard]

How so? How is it helping his country to publically critisize your biggest ally? The players in SL cricket don't even get paid regularly, and they have to go to other tournaments to make a living, and yet despite their objections, you schedule something outside the FTP and flaunt it in people's faces? Who exactly is he helping? How was he doing what was best for his country? Or make public a private offer of money that could save you for bankruptcy and then blame BCCI for trying to 'buy' SLC cricket.

I want to know what benefit SLC got or would have gotten from his actions, because I can't think of a single thing.

Ind33d.