|Print this article|
'I am contracted to BCCI for doing television commentary; so that is something that has to be put on record as well. If after that the honourable Supreme Court tells you to do something then, quite clearly, yes, you have little choice but to accept.'
Batting legend Sunil Gavaskar says will be "honoured" and "happy" to adhere to the directive of the Supreme Court, which, on Thursday, suggested that he should replace N Srinivasan as interim president of the Board of Control for Cricket in India.
"First and foremost, the thing to understand is that when the highest court of the land tells you to do something then I think you have no choice in the matter. But it has also to be put on record that the fact I am contracted to BCCI for doing television commentary; so that is something that has to be put on record as well. And if after that the honourable Supreme Court tells you to do something then, quite clearly, yes, you have little choice but to accept what the Supreme Court tells you to do," Gavaskar said.
"As I said, there is nothing that you can do once the Supreme Court tells you to do and I would be very happy to do that; there is no issue whatsoever. If the Supreme Court reposes its trust and faith in me, I will be very happy to do what they want me to do. I'm ready to take on what ever comes my way," he told NDTV.
- Please click NEXT for more...
Gavaskar, a former India captain, said he will wait for the final order from the court.
"I will consider it; it will be a huge honour that Supreme Court feels I will be good enough to do the job. But we will have to wait and watch until tomorrow in which direction it goes. Let's not jump the gun," he said.
Asked if he is prepared for the challenge, Gavaskar replied: "As an opening batsman, you have to be prepared for all kinds of challenges, you have to play in all kinds of pitches, you are always prepared for a challenge mentally and physically.
"Even today, although I am happy to be away from the limelight, I am prepared to do what is needed if the Supreme Court wants me to do so," he added.
The Supreme Court also proposed the suspension of Chennai Super Kings and Rajasthan Royals from the Indian Premier League pending the outcome of the betting and spot-fixing case, which rocked the Twenty20 tournament last year.
"It is sad. They were the champions. In 2008, Rajasthan Royals were the champions, and Chennai Super Kings won three times; they have brought a lot of joy, so this observation will make cricket fans sad," Gavaskar said.
- Please click NEXT for more...
Former BCCI president Shashank Manohar on Wednesday demanded the suspension of IPL 7 till a thorough probe by the CBI is completed, but Gavaskar wondered how will it help the game.
"Not having the IPL I dont know how it is going to help. When the match-fixing saga came out in 1999-2000, about 13 or 14 years ago, nobody said stop Test cricket or stop ODI cricket; you carried on. What you want to do is have measures in places to try and see that this does not happen. And again, there is no guarantee that even with the strongest of measures that you take this will not happen, because it is human nature and human nature can succumb to a lot of things.
"So there is no guarantee whatsoever, but as long as you try and put effective measures in place then I think after the experience of last year, what has happened that there is going to be anti-corruption officer who is going to be available at every single franchise and that makes a huge difference.
"The younger players, the Under-19 players, who have no idea whom to approach now know that this is the gentleman to approach in case they are approached by unwanted elements. So it is a lot easier to report than previous years when probably the players who where approached had no one to go to," he added.
Asked for his views on Srinivasan, who did not resign even after the Supreme Court's observation, Gavaskar said: "You got to also understand that until a person is proven guilty he is innocent until then. So as far as Mr Srinivasan is doing then it is entirely up to him. To pass a judgement on what the Supreme Court has said about Srinivasan is not in my field because I am not a legal person."