Anonymous letter creates ripples in CAB, Sourav Ganguly gets firm response
The letter alleged that the selectors Palash Nandy and Madan Ghosh are guilty of having a conflict of interest.
Published - Aug 9, 2018 7:06 pm | Updated - Aug 9, 2018 7:06 pm
The Cricket Association of Bengal (CAB) has found itself in an unwanted position with an anonymous letter creating serious ripples in the association. The letter was addressed to the association and targeted a couple of key members for having ‘conflict of interest’ positions in the board. The impact was clearly seen as the CAB ombudsman, Ushanath Banerjee, and the CAB President Sourav Ganguly had conflicting stance in the issue.
The letter alleged that the selectors Palash Nandy and Madan Ghosh are guilty of having a conflict of interest. It was Banerjee who received the anonymous letter. The letter cited that the senior selector panel chief Palash Nandy is associated with a cricket coaching camp. Also, the letter alleged that Ghosh is associated with a coaching camp as well and had earlier represented the White Border Club in the CAB meetings.
Apparently, Banerjee seemed to be taking the letter seriously. However, the board President Sourav Ganguly had a stance wherein he did not want the ombudsman to pay heed to such anonymous letters. “The Cricket Association of Bengal will not entertain any such anonymous communication and as such you being an important part of the organisation should follow the same. I feel you are not entitled to give any reply,” Ganguly wrote as per the reports in Thestatesman.
Ombudsman hits back at Ganguly
This certainly did not go down too well with Banerjee and he was quick to respond back to the president. The response was also circulated in the media. Banerjee firmly noted that by addressing such letters, he is aiming to keep the functioning of the association transparent. He went on to state that Sourav Ganguly is apparently uninformed about the fact that over the years, there have been several such cases where the judiciary has taken cues from anonymous letters.
“It is widely acknowledged that in the interest of maintaining transparency, organisations world over take cognizance of anonymous information,” Banerjee quoted.
“You have been incorrectly advised by persons without any homework being done and based on mere knowledge in the subject matter in issue. I humbly request you to kindly point out the said policy of CAB, as referred in your letter, and the date when so adopted,” Banerjee wrote to Ganguly.