Modi flays Ranatunga for blasting IPL

Lalit Modi has hit back at SLC chairman Arjuna Ranatunga for his "continuous blasting" of the IPL, saying his outbursts were totally uncalled for.

updated: November 01, 2008 09:23 IST
  • Total Shares

New Delhi:

BCCI vice-president Lalit Modi has hit back at Sri Lanka Cricket chairman Arjuna Ranatunga for his "continuous blasting" of the Indian Premier League, saying his outbursts were totally uncalled for.

Modi, however, insisted that the Indian board has the "best of relationships" with the SLC and players.

Ranatunga had blamed the IPL for causing a loss of $ 3 million revenue to SLC due to the postponement of Sri Lanka's England tour next year, and said it was unfair that national boards don't benefit financially from the cash-rich Twenty20 tournament.

"Ranatunga is totally unjustified in his continuous blasting of IPL," Modi said.

"At a meeting held in Bangkok a few weeks ago where BCCI officials mest the Sri Lankan management -- both board and government representatives -- the BCCI secretary (N Srinivasan) had clearly pointed out that it had no idea why such hostility exists.

"We are looking for answers. We hope to find a solution which is beneficial to both boards at the earliest. The officials were also quite perturbed that the situation had escalated to where it is today and were also looking for answers," Modi told a cricket website.

Modi said SLC alone was to be blamed for the clash of dates of the second season of IPL and Lanka's England tour next year as it knew the IPL schedule before fixing dates with ECB.

"We prepared our (IPL) schedule as per the FTP, which is prepared years in advance, and we signed the players for a certain term based on that. Both Sri Lanka board officials and players were in the knowledge of the schedule. The ECB invited Sri Lanka without knowing that the players had already received a NOC to play for the IPL from the Sri Lankan board.

"Besides, if you go by the FTP, there was an additional tri-series scheduled between India, Sri Lanka and South Africa (during that period), which was to be confirmed by all parties. Therefore Sri Lanka should not have signed the MoU with ECB without first taking into account the above two issues."