'How's Sachin Tendulkar's one-off commentary stint a conflict?'

MUMBAI: The office of the Supreme Court-appointed ombudsman and ethics officer, DK Jain, has come out with three separate orders on matters involving former India cricketers Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman. If all the three orders are read separately, as written by Jain - a former apex court justice himself - only the one pertaining to Laxman, dated 20-6-2019, deals with the latter's potential conflict as commentator in the India matches.
WORLD CUP SCHEDULE| POINTS TABLE
TOI procured the copies of all the three orders. The order on Tendulkar was sent out by Jain's office on 25-05-2019 and the one on Ganguly came out four days ago, on 16-06-2019.
It is only in Laxman's case that the ombudsman has ruled the following: "… Clause (d) of the sub rule (4) of Rule 38 (in BCCI constitution) does not carve out any distinction between a 'commentator' engaged by or through BCCI or such a contract / agreement entered into by the individual directly. If an individual is associated with the BCCI in any capacity, and is a 'commentator', in my view clause (d) of sub-rule (4) of rule 38 gets attracted".
Simply put, the ombudsman's view is that whether Laxman is engaged through the BCCI as commentator or directly with the broadcaster, he remains conflicted.
However, the remaining two orders from Jain - on Tendulkar and Ganguly - do not touch upon the subject of commentary at all. "Someone in the cricket board is deliberately trying to tarnish the reputation of some of India's greatest cricketers and that is pretty evident. Tendulkar retired in 2013 and not once, twice but on multiple occasions, he had made it clear he is not interested in commentary. This one time, he happened to be in England and agreed to be in the commentary box just two weeks before the start of the tournament only for select matches," sources in direct know of developments told TOI.
Six years since retirement, Tendulkar has never shown interest in commentary and has rejected offers on each and every occasion. "The English summer is when he holidays in the UK every year. He's a permanent presence at the Wimbledon. Because he was there, he agreed to do this stint. And that has given a reason for BCCI to say he cannot talk on air. How is that a conflict," say industry veterans.
In the case of Ganguly, the former India captain had done commentary in the 2017 Champions Trophy too and when it was pointed out as potential conflict, the Committee of Administrators (COA) defended Ganguly by saying "it was a one-off ICC event".
"The Champions Trophy was a one-off. Not the World Cup? Apples and oranges as and when things suit people," sources added.
Those who understand the broadcasting ecosystem are worried with this present trend in Indian cricket of bringing anybody and everybody in the conflict net. "By that count, Gautam Gambhir shouldn't be doing commentary because he's a Member of the Parliament. Harbhajan, Parthiv and Irfan Pathan are still playing. So, the BCCI wants all of them to sit and home and not earn a livelihood for themselves? How are they even conflicted?" industry sources say.
The ombudsman / ethics officer, in these cases, is simply going by the BCCI constitution - one that has been drafted by the temporary dispensation and is still being heard in the Supreme Court. "A player can't talk about the game he plays, can't play in leagues overseas, can't express an opinion, can't do anything. Who can? Court-appointed administrators?" sources say.