Advertisement
Laxman said the COA has been using the CAC only for the selection of senior national coaches despite promising a broader role earlier.
Not known to be the most aggressive off the field, the stylish Hyderabadi, in his official response to Ombudsman-cum-Ethics-Officer, gave a rather aggressive rebuttal on the allegations of ‘Conflict of Interest’ while concluding that he is ready to “recuse” if found conflicted.
“On December 7, 2018, we had written to the the Committee of Administrators requesting them to clarify the scope of our role and responsibilities. To this date, there has been no reply. Since no tenure had been mentioned in the letter of intent issued in 2015, it was only reasonable to expect some communication on whether the CAC was still in existence. Unfortunately that hasn’t been forthcoming,” Laxman wrote in his affidavit filed through his lawyer.
Related Articles
Advertisement
“It will be worthwhile to note that the reason I agreed to be a member was because of the various inputs we were originally tasked with contributing towards the sustained growth of Indian cricket. The opportunity to be involved meaningfully in India’s climb towards becoming a cricketing superpower post retirement was privilege enough for me to turn down the offer of remuneration of being a part of CAC,” Laxman said in his affidavit, point 3 (c).
“The allegation of the complainant are baseless as we are in no manner selectors of either players or coaches and CAC is not a permanent body,” he wrote.