NEWS
SCHEDULES
COLUMNS
PREVIOUS TOURS
OTHER SPORTS
STATISTICS
INTERVIEWS
SLIDE SHOW
ARCHIVES

Dalmiya refutes allegations

International Cricket Council president Jagmohan Dalmiya today condemned efforts to malign him and the ICC, saying there is a deliberate effort to twist words.

In a statement from Calcutta, he said there is no question of any financial irregularity "of even a single penny, leave alone four million dollars", as alleged, in the television rights deal for the ICC knock-out tournament in 1998.

Following is the text of his statement:

"Before the executive board met in London last week there were allegations of irregularities against me for the TV rights of the ICC knock-out 1998. On one hand it was alleged that I had favoured Prasar Bharati and on the other, I had deprived Prasar Bharati of four million dollars. In the executive board meeting, it was explained that there was neither any financial irregularity nor any financial negotiation by me with any of the bidders.

"After the meeting the ICC chief executive had rightly stated in the media briefing that I was in no way involved with any negotiation with any of the four bidders. But it appears that there is a deliberate attempt to twist the words of the chief executive.

"By the term 'negotiation', the chief executive had implied financial dealings with the bidders. But the efforts are now to concoct a story out of whom I had spoken to or through internal notes in the files of Prasar Bharati.

"The truth is that I did not enter into any financial negotiation with any bidder.If however,any bidder had sought clarifications from me about the methodology of revenue sharing or had appealed to me for time extension to submit their bids,these were mere discussions and cannot certainly be termed as 'financial negotiation'. As a result of such discussions, the price had neither been varied nor affected and this was amply clarified by the chief executive during the media briefing on May 2nd."

"I was in no way involved in fine tuning revenue sharing arrangements with any of the bidders and/or their licensees or sub-licensees. Any such insinuation can best be described as an effort to malign through distorted facts by diverting from the main issues.

"The ICC had initially received four bids for the TV rights of the 1998 knockout. Prasar Bharati and TWI which had quoted on the basis of a buyout, were the two highest bidders, Prasar Bharati's offer was 8.5 million dollars and TWI's offer was 8.2 million dollars.

Since both offers were for buyouts, it was decided that revised bids be invited from these two highest bidders only on the basis of revenue sharing. Prasar Bharati emerged the highest again with its offer of a minimum guarantee of 10 million dollars and sharing of any revenues beyond 14.33 million dollars on the basis of 75:25 between ICC and Prasar Bharati. Prasar Bharati would retain all earnings from 10 million dollars to 14.33 million dollars, inclusive of production costs.TWI had offered 9.15 million dollars as a minimum guarantee.

"Being the highest bidder in both cases, Prasar Bharati had been given the rights. Where is the question of any irregularity?

"If any undue favour had to be meted out to Prasar Bharati, they could have been given the rights straight away when they had emerged highest in the initial bid.

"The entire revenue earned from Prasar Bharati has gone to the ICC and the accounts are quite clear on that. The ICC was only concerned with the minimum guarantee offer and the revenue beyond which it would be entitled to its 75 per cent share."