Gautam Gambhir called me fixer: S Sreesanth
Surat, Dec 7: Former pacer S Sreesanth on Thursday alleged that ex-India teammate Gautam Gambhir called him a "fixer" during a Legends League Cricket match here.
The two World Cup-winning players were involved in a heated exchange during an Eliminator match between Indian Capitals and Gujarat Giants here on Wednesday.
The umpires had to intervene ad separate the two players.
"He kept on calling me 'fixer fixer, you are a fixer, **** off you fixer on live television on centre wicket," Sreesanth said while going live from his Instagram handle.
"I just said 'what are you saying', I kept laughing in a sarcastic way. He spoke to the umpires in the same language when they tried to control him," he added.
Sreesanth was handed a life ban by the BCCI's disciplinary committee due to his alleged involvement in the IPL 2013 spot fixing scandal.
However, the ban was reduced to seven years in 2019 by the Supreme court of India.
"From my side, I didn't use any bad word. Please guys support the real truth. He has been doing it with a lot of people. I have no idea why he started it, it was the end of the over.
"Now his people are saying sixer sixer bola hai but unhone bola you fixer, tu fixer hai (his people are claiming he said sixer sixer but he said you are a fixer). This is not the way to talk. I'm thinking of leaving it (the incident) here but his people are trying to save him. I request you all to not fall for extra paid PR work," Sreesanth added.
An hour after Sreesanth went live. Gambhir, who is a BJP MP from East Delhi, posted on X a picture of himself in the Indian jersey smiling, captioning it "Smile when the world is all about attention!"
On Wednesday, in another Instagram live video after the game Sreesanth had called Gambhir "Mr fighter", adding that he did not even respect senior players.
"Just wanted to clear the air with what happened with Mr fighter. One who always fights with all his colleagues. For no reason whatsoever. He does not even respect his own senior players, including Viru Bahi ( Virender Sehwag).
"That's exactly what happened today. Without any provocation, he just kept on calling me something which was very rude which shouldn't have been said by Mr Gautam Gambhir," Sreesanth had said.
"I am not at all at fault here. I just wanted to clear the air straight away. What Mr Gauti has done, sooner or later all of you will get to know. The words that he used and the things he said on a cricket field, live, is not acceptable.
"My family, my state, everybody has gone through so much. I fought that battle with all your support. Now people want to down me for no reason. He said things he shouldn't have said. I will surely let you know what he said," he reiterated.
This is not the first time Gambhir has been involved in an on field altercation. He has had fiery exchanges with Virat Kohli a couple of times during the IPL, including earlier this year when Royal Challengers Bangalore took on Lucknow Super Giants.
Gambhir was LSG's mentor back then.
View this post on Instagram
Heated conversation between Gautam Gambhir and S Sreesanth in the LLC. pic.twitter.com/Cjl99SWAWK
— Mufaddal Vohra (@mufaddal_vohra) December 7, 2023
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_22.jpeg)
