Bumrah says he had ruled out India captaincy during IPL, informed BCCI before Rohit's retirement
Leeds, Jun 17 (PTI): The peerless Jasprit Bumrah has revealed that he had ruled out Test captaincy during the IPL itself as part of his workload management, and had informed the BCCI of his desire to prioritise his bowling responsbilities over leadership duties.
During an interaction with former India wicketkeeper-batter Dinesh Karthik on Sky Sports Cricket, Bumrah explained the thought process behind his decision to turn down the Indian Test captaincy.
"There's no fancy stories to it. There is no controversy or a headlining statement that I was sacked. Before Rohit and Virat retired, I had spoken to the BCCI during the IPL about my workload going forward in a five-match series," Bumrah said.
"I've spoken to the people who have managed my back, I've spoken to the surgeon as well, who's always spoken to me about how smart you have to be about the workloads.
"And then we came to the conclusion that I have to be a little smarter. So then I called the BCCI and said I don't want to be looked at in a leadership role, because I won't be able to give all matches coming to a five-match Test series," added Bumrah.
After Rohit's retirement and with Bumrah ruling himself out, the BCCI appointed Shubman Gill as the skipper of the Test team with his first assignment being the five-match Test series against England, beginning in Leeds on Friday.
During the interaction, Bumrah stressed on the need for continuity in leadership, particularly in a long series, something he would not be able to offer because of his heavy workload as the team's premier bowler.
"The BCCI was looking at me at (a) leadership (role). But then I had to say no as it's not fair for the team as well. It's not fair to the team if in a five-Test series, three matches somebody else is leading and two matches somebody else is leading.
"I always wanted to put the team first, even if me being there as a player offers a lot more just not as a captain," Bumrah said.
"Captaincy is a position. But you always have leaders in the team and I wanted to do. Obviously, if I'm not careful, I don't know about the future, and I don't want to be in a situation where I have to abruptly go away from this format.
"So, I thought that for continuity, and it is only fair to the team that you know the team goes in that direction, where they look at long-term and I could help in whatever way," he added.
Bumrah acknowledged that leading the Indian Test team is a huge honour but added that he loves the game more than captaincy.
"Captaincy meant a lot. I had worked very hard for it. But, unfortunately, sometimes you have to look after the bigger picture. I love cricket more than captaincy so I want to contribute more as a cricketer and to the Indian team as a player.
"Obviously ambitions are there but that's how it is and I called the BCCI and said that I don't want to be looked at in a leadership role," said the magnificent fast bowler.
Plan to play three Tests in England
As far as his participation in the England series in concerned, Bumrah is planning to play in at least three Test matches, including the opener at Headingley.
"Obviously, the number is not decided. First (Test) is definitely on, that is going to happen. Rest, we will see how things are, what is the workload and scenario... but yes, 3 Tests is what I can manage at the moment."
India head coach Gautam Gambhir had also said Bumrah could play three Tests in the coming weeks.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_28.jpeg)
