Modi trying to tarnish BCCI image: Manohar

June 05, 2010 05:18 pm | Updated November 28, 2021 09:11 pm IST - MUMBAI

BCCI president Shashank Manohar on Saturday accused the former IPL chief Lalit Modi of trying to tarnish the image of the Board and making misleading allegations against interim IPL chairman Chirayu Amin. File photo

BCCI president Shashank Manohar on Saturday accused the former IPL chief Lalit Modi of trying to tarnish the image of the Board and making misleading allegations against interim IPL chairman Chirayu Amin. File photo

Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) president Shashank Manohar on Saturday hit out at the suspended Indian Premier League (IPL) chairman Lalit Modi, saying Mr. Modi was trying to tarnish the BCCI image by making false and misleading statements time and again, especially when the Board was in an embarrassing situation because of his “misdeeds.”

In a statement, Mr. Manohar presented the BCCI's account of the Chirayu Amin story in relation to the second Invitation to Tender to identify the two additional franchises for the next IPL season IV. The Invitation to Tender was opened in Chennai on March 21. Mr. Modi did not inform the IPL governing council members about Managing Director of City Corporation Ltd. Aniruddha Deshpande making a bid for the Pune franchise in his personal capacity.

“Since yesterday [Friday], Mr. Modi has been trying to malign the image of the Board and Mr. Amin by making statements which are far from the truth. I did not react earlier when he made allegations against me and the Honorary Secretary, as I did not wish to dignify his ridiculous allegations with a repartee. Today, I am replying because he is trying to tarnish the image of the Board and its members,” Mr. Manohar said.

Responding to Mr. Modi's assertion that Mr. Amin (vice-president) was a party to the second Invitation to Tender, Mr. Manohar said: “It is alleged by Mr. Modi that Mr. Amin had given a bid along with the Pune franchisee (City Corporation Ltd). He has also alleged that I did not inform him about the letter from Mr. Amin seeking permission to bid, and that the said communication was suppressed from him and the governing council members. The truth is that it was Mr. Modi who sent a message to the Pune franchisee [bidder], through Mr. Ajay Shirke [Maharashtra Cricket Association president], to ask it to contact Mr. Amin to be part of the consortium.”

Mr. Manohar said:

“When the Pune franchisee approached Mr. Amin…, he informed them that he might join the consortium by making an investment of up to 10 per cent. Mr. Amin have sent me a letter [on March 17], with a copy to the Honorary Secretary, informing that he has been approached by the Pune franchisee.

“In his letter, he clearly states that should City Corporation Ltd. win the bid, he would formally approach the Board for a sanction to invest in the consortium. The letter itself makes it very clear that it was a proposal with a pre-condition that Mr. Amin would seek a formal sanction if only the bid succeeded.

“The Board and the governing council would have needed to consider Mr. Amin's case only if and when he put forward a concrete proposal to invest.

“First and foremost, Mr. Amin's letter was not asking for permission to bid. Secondly, he was not a bidder [along] with City Corporation Ltd., and even Mr. Modi has agreed with this in his interview to Times Now.

“It is thus clear that the claim of Mr. Modi that Mr. Amin was a bidder is misleading and is only to malign the image of the Board and it members.”

As for Mr. Deshpande's decision to make a personal bid for the Pune franchise, Mr. Manohar said, “Mr. Modi, who claims to be above board in all matters, did not think that this very cogent and important piece of information should be shared with the governing council members and officials. His statement becomes even more questionable in light of the fact that the bid document tendered on behalf of City Corporation Ltd. gives information only regarding City Corporation Ltd. and does not give any personal information about Mr. Deshpande. The bid could have been rejected at the threshold, if it had been from Mr. Deshpande in his individual capacity, as it did not carry the necessary information about the bidder.”

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.