Top BCCI officials overruled in-charge on commentators’ salaries, emails show
Early last year BCCI ex-president N Srinivasan (L) intervened to get player-turned-commentator L Sivaramakrishnan a favourable contract.
Emails exchanged between BCCI officials have shed light on how top cricket officials decided the remuneration of commentators and even pulled up the chief of the board’s production unit when he objected to the contract details of an expert on the commentary panel.
Early last year, the then BCCI president N Srinivasan intervened to get player-turned-commentator L Sivaramakrishnan a favourable contract, despite resistance from production chief James Rego, emails accessed by The Indian Express show.
In an email to IPL CEO Sundar Raman, Rego wrote about the issue of the commentator’s contract and how it made his “work difficult” if “all and sundry can directly have access to president or the secretary for production-related matters”.
N Srinivasan dragging names of former crickets to cover up, alleges Aditya Verma
BCCI’s IPL probe panel faces conflict of interest questions
Jagmohan Dalmiya delays N Srinivasan's comeback bid as BCCI calls off meet
After Dhoni 'conflict of interest',mandatory business disclosure clause for players
Srinivasan set to attend ICC meet,to oppose uniform DRS implementation
India Cements builds a bond,employs over 100 cricketers
Reacting to this, Srinivasan, in an email to the then secretary Sanjay Patel, wrote that Rego “should find another job” and that he doesn’t know “why he (Rego) should continue in BCCI”.
Srinivasan further wrote, “While contracts with (Sunil) Gavaskar and (Ravi) Shastri have been finalised, in the case of L Sivaramakrishnan, I understand that James Rego has stated the contract would be on a series to series basis. He (Rego) has no authority to overrule the Working Committee decision.””I also understand he has conveyed to L Sivaramakrishnan his disapproval of what he terms as interference by the president’s office in this matter.
Kasi (Viswanathan, secretary of the Tamil Nadu association and Srinivasan’s assistant) informs me that such a call has not been made by him. In any case, what is wrong if he had done so. James Rego has no business to make such comments. If he disagrees with Working Committee decision or with any office bearers, he can quit and find another job. Kindly convey this to Sundar also…. I don’t know why he (Rego) should continue in BCCI.”
When contacted, Rego and Raman refused to comment.
Kasi admitted to the sequence of events and said, “Rego’s move to restrict Siva’s contract was against the decision taken by the BCCI — the Working Committee had decided that Siva was entitled to a 72-day contract. That’s the reason Mr Srinivasan intervened.”
According to the emails, Srinivasan also supported a higher remuneration for V B Chandrasekhar, the former selector-turned-commentator. Rego was concerned that if Chandrasekhar is paid Rs 35,000 a day, as Srinivasan desired, he would get Rs 5,000 more than Sivaramakrishnan, who might demand higher pay then. Rego mailed his objection to Raman, who replied that he had already spoken to Srinivasan, who had approved Chandrasekhar’s remuneration.
Raman wrote: “This (Rs 35,000) works out to apprx 11k increase per day x 70 days (sic). He has approved the same. Kindly from the next season pre agree the terms ahead of the season. I was told there was no discussion and a contract was presented to them after the season had started.”
Rego also raised the issue of some commentators using their connection with Srinivasan to get their way. “At ground level, we have to handle these people (including our international commentary superstars), and if all and sundry can directly have access to president or the secretary for production-related matters and have their way, then it only makes our work more difficult as you will understand,” Rego wrote to Raman.
He added, “Would request to know if Siva’s fees have been considered as mentioned above. If they have a complaint related to our way of working and that is reported, that is absolutely no problem, but request such general production matters when brought up directly should not be entertained and directed back to me please.
