What rules did Ex-CSK team principal Gurunath Meiyappan breach?

Gurunath Meiyappan

Justice Mukul Mudgal-led IPL probe committee have confirmed that Gurunath Meiyappan, son-in-law of the BCCI chief N.Srinivasan, was a team official of Chennai Super Kings. The committee, which submitted its report earlier today, also revealed that Meiyappan had violated several operational rules of the Indian Premier League. The list of rules violated by the ex-CSK team principal are given below.

IPL Operations Rules (for bringing the game into disrepute)

Section 2.2.1: Each franchisee shall procure that its team shall in good faith compete to the best of its ability in the League in general and in each match in which its team participates.

Section 2.14: Each person subject to these operational rules shall not, whether during a match or otherwise, act or omit to act in any way which would or might reasonably be anticipated to have an adverse affect on the image and/or reputation of such person, any team, any player, any team official, the BCCI, the League and/or the game or which would otherwise bring any of the foregoing into disrepute.

IPL Anti-Corruption Code (betting)

Articles 2.2.1: Placing, accepting, laying or otherwise entering into any bet with any other party (whether individual, company or otherwise) in relation to the result, progress, conduct or any other aspect of any match or event.

Articles 2.2.2: Soliciting, including, enticing, instructing, persuading, encouraging, facilitating or authorising any other party to enter into a bet for the direct or indirect benefit of the participant in relation to the result, progress, conduct or any other aspect of any match or event.

Articles 2.2.3: Ensuring the occurrence of a particular incident in a match or event, which occurrence is to the participant’s knowledge the subject of a bet and for which he/she expects to receive or has received any reward.

IPL Code of Conduct for players and team officials (for bringing the game into disrepute)

Article 2.4.4: Where the facts of the alleged incident are not adequately or clearly covered by any of the above offences, conduct that either; (a) is contrary to the spirit of the game; or (b) brings the game into disrepute.