The Supreme Court has put BCCI president Anurag Thakur in what could be a difficult position by asking him to submit a personal affidavit to clarify whether he had sought ICC intervention against the implementation of the Lodha Committees recommendations.Last month ICC chief executive Dave Richardson had told India Today that Thakur had verbally asked the ICC for a letter asking whether implementing one of the Lodha Committees recommendations would constitute government interference in the BCCI. The Lodha Committee had said that one of the nine members on the Apex Council should be a nominee from the Comptroller and Auditor Generals office, a government organisation. The ICC does not permit any government interference in its member boards.Richardson had said that ICC chairman Shashank Manohar, Thakurs predecessor at the BCCI, had refused to intervene unless the Indian board put its request in writing.Amicus Curiae Gopal Subramanium had drawn the Supreme Courts attention to the issue while reading out from the Lodha Committees status report on Thursday. Interview aired by media with ICC CEO David Richardson showing that President BCCI had requested ICC to issue a letter stating that the intervention by this Honble Court amounted to Governmental interference, the status report said.Subramanium told the court that the BCCI had denied that Thakur had asked the ICC for a letter and instead said Richardson was confused. It is being incorrectly alleged that the President BCCI made a request to the ICC to issue a letter stating that this Committee amounts to Governmental interference. This suggestion is denied, the BCCI affidavit, submitted in court on October 5 as a response to the status report, had said.The affidavit said Richardson falsely stated events. It appears that an interview was given by Mr. David Richardson the ICC CEO falsely stating that the BCCI President had requested the ICC to issue a letter stating that the intervention by this Hon ble Court amounted to Governmental interference. It is submitted that no such letter or oral request was ever made to the said gentlemen either by the BCCI President or any office bearer of the BCCI. It is apparent that Mr. Richardson has confused himself in relation to the issue.The Chief Justice of India TS Thakur, leading the three-judge bench, wondered if Richardson was aware of the BCCIs remarks. Is he [Mr. Richardson] still the CEO? Does he know that he is being maligned ... the accusation is that David Richardson made a false statement that the BCCI asked him to issue a letter, Chief Justice Thakur was quoted as saying by the Hindu on Thursday.The BCCIs affidavit also said that during his tenure as board president Manohar had also expressed reservations against having a CAG nominee on the Apex Council. According to the BCCI, Manohar had changed his stance since becoming ICC chairman.This issue is required to be considered in the light of the fact that Mr. Shashank Manohar Senior Advocate had clearly opined as the BCCI President that appointment of the CAG in the BCCI shall result in suspension of the BCCI as it would constitute governmental interference. In fact the same had been submitted on affidavit before this Hon ble Court.However, as Chairman of the ICC, Mr. Manohar had taken a contrary stand and clarification was sought by Mr. Anurag Thakur during an informal discussion on what the exact status would be if the CAG was inducted by the BCCI as part its management and whether it would amount to governmental interference as had been advised and affirmed by Mr. Manohar during his stint as BCCI President, the boards affidavit said.Chief Justice Thakur then asked Subramanium who had sworn to the BCCI affidavit. When he was told it was Ratnakar Shetty, the boards administrative and game development manager, the court was curious as to how Shetty had been privy to an alleged conversation that took place between Thakur and the ICC.The court then asked Shetty to file a separate undertaking stating how he was allowed to sign the affidavit as a response to the Lodha Committees status report. It asked Shetty to, place on record a copy of the authorisation/resolution passed by the BCCI on the basis of which he has filed the affidavit supporting the response of the BCCI to the status report.BCCI president Anurag Thakur is set to leave for Cape Town to attend ICC board meetings between October 10 and 14, where he will meet Richardson and Manohar, the ICC parties mentioned in the Lodha Committees status report and BCCI affidavit. Anthony Rendon Nationals Jersey . In the lead up - which seemed to begin the moment Mike Geiger blew the whistle in Houston last Thursday night - the Impact rumour mill went into overdrive. The speculation went into meltdown mode, of the golden nugget variety. Ivan Rodriguez Jersey . "Trying to breathe," he said with a grin. Bernier stopped 42 of 43 shots on Monday night, including all 22 in a hectic middle frame, his heroic performance propelling the Leafs toward an undue point in their final game before the Christmas break. https://www.cheapnationals.com/1207r-andrew-stevenson-jersey-nationals.html . John Tavares, Thomas Vanek and Kyle Okposo were also being counted on to slow down sizzling Rangers forward Rick Nash. That plan didnt go so well early. Wander Suero Nationals Jersey . Louis Blues teammates who would also be participating in the Olympics, Alex Pietrangelo felt right at home, no different in some ways to the travel experience of any old road trip – save for the length of the journey, that is. Wholesale Nationals Jerseys . Woodson said during a radio interview Thursday that the Knicks Carmelo Anthony doesnt get the same calls as other superstars. When the NCAA last year meted out its sanctions against the SMU Mustangs, sanctions that included a postseason ban and suspension of head coach Larry Brown, I posed a simple question: What did the school expect when it hired Brown?Nine months later as Brown announces his sudden resignation, reportedly over a contract dispute, its time to ask the same question.What did SMU expect?Reality TV cultivates longer-lasting relationships than hiring Brown. Since 1965, he has cashed paychecks from 15 different employers. Forget a rocking chair or watch for years of service. For Brown, staying put long enough to become fully vested in a 401(k) plan is considered an accomplishment. He spent six seasons with the Philadelphia 76ers, which in Brown parlance counts as longevity.The country is littered with his resignation papers, from Los Angeles, where he resigned ahead of the NCAA posse at UCLA, to New Jersey, where he bolted after the Nets stumbled; in Americas heartland, where he departed Kansas amid more NCAA trouble; and in the South, where he decided not to join the Carolina Cougars when they relocated to St. Louis; from the West, where he left the Denver Nuggets after two years, to the Southwest, where he left the Spurs midway through the season.You could call that nomadic.Narcissistic would be more accurate.On April 7, 1969, Brown landed his first head-coaching job, using his connections with his college coach, Dean Smith, to get the top gig at Davidson. In a newspaper clipping from The Dispatch, the 28-year-old Brown said, I will be coaching at a school I have always respected and I hope we can carry on the same high traditions.On July 3, 1969 -- a whopping 91 days later -- he left Davidson to carry on those high traditions without him, resigning his position. He hadnt so much as coached a practice, let alone a game (his tenure was so short, in fact, it doesnt even make his Wikipedia bio page). He later claimed the school didnt live up to its promises.That, of course, is a common refrain. The school, the NBA franchise, some organization always fails to live up to promises made to Brown.This time it is SMU on the wrong side of the tracks. Brown reportedly wanted a five-year contract extension. School administrators, perhaps considering the 75-year-old had just led the university down the trenches of an NCAA investigation and into a postseason ban and other sanctions, thought a two- or three-yyear deal might make more sense (which is rather generous if you consider the totality of things).dddddddddddd Brown disagreed and so, just two days into the vicious recruiting cycle, he packed up his whistle and left.Just like always, skipping out of town without care or responsibility. UCLA sanctions? Kansas violations so egregious an NCAA official once joked the Jayhawks were on the bubble for the death penalty? Misunderstandings and misinformation twisted for the NCAAs benefit.The man who preaches his love for his kids spent most of last season bemoaning the fact that the NCAA wrongly penalized Nic Moore and Markus Kennedy with a postseason ban when they werent guilty of any wrongdoing.Which is true.Its also true that Larry Brown was guilty of NCAA wrongdoing and thereby he did his players wrong. He broke promises to them, promises to be honorable, to obey NCAA rules and to, as crazy as it sounds, prohibit secretaries from doing an athletes coursework. Had he kept those promises the NCAA would not have visited campus and Moore and Kennedy would have enjoyed the fruits of their regular-season labor in March.Except that would never occur to Brown, the perennially put-upon victim. For all the college and NBA teams who have let him down, he never once recognized the people he has let down as well.Because if there are two truisms in his illustrious career, it is these:The man is a brilliant basketball mind, one of the best coaches to walk across a court.And above everything and everyone, Larry Brown is loyal to Larry Brown first, second and always. The first truism means someone will hire him somewhere. The second means his next employer, too, will eventually be stood up, discarded or disappointed.The only sign of progress in this entire ordeal is that SMU at least had the good sense to name Tim Jankovich as its coach-in-waiting. The school, at least, realized that with Brown there is no such thing as a long-term commitment, and that Jankovich wasnt going to be Mike Hopkins, the Prince Charles of college hoops forever waiting for Syracuse King Jim Boeheim to resign.No, the school hired Jankovich a mere nine days after it announced Brown would be the head coach because administrators knew theyd need a backup plan.With Larry Brown, what else would you expect? ' ' '