'Was Lalit Modi Under the Influence When He Released the IPL Slapgate Video?'

Synopsis
Key Takeaways
- Harbhajan Singh condemned Lalit Modi's release of the slapgate video.
- Modi's video sharing was deemed unnecessary by Harbhajan.
- The slapgate incident occurred in 2008 during IPL.
- Harbhajan acknowledged his wrongdoing and expressed regret.
- Disciplinary actions were taken against Harbhajan following the incident.
New Delhi, Oct 5 (NationPress) Former Indian cricketer Harbhajan Singh has criticized former Indian Premier League (IPL) chairman Lalit Modi for sharing a video of the notorious slapgate incident from 2008 involving Harbhajan and pacer S. Sreesanth, suggesting Modi must have been 'under the influence' when he released it.
On August 29, Modi shared the footage from IPL 2008 during an interview with former Australian captain Michael Clarke on the Beyond23 Cricket Podcast.
"I fail to see the need for making this public. Everyone has their perspective. What transpired was wrong, and I have already expressed my regret. The incident with Sreesanth was inappropriate. As an athlete, I recognize that I should have acted differently. Mistakes serve as lessons, and had I possessed greater wisdom at that time, I would have avoided it," Harbhajan explained to IANS.
In the viral video shared by Modi, then-captain of Mumbai Indians, Harbhajan was seen striking Sreesanth with a backhand slap during their post-match handshake. The encounter incited Sreesanth's anger, leading him to approach Harbhajan, who reciprocated the agitation. A potential brawl was averted when Irfan Pathan and Mahela Jayawardene quickly intervened to separate the players.
This shocking event drew media scrutiny and led to widespread condemnation of Harbhajan's actions, prompting him to apologize for the incident. Subsequently, a disciplinary hearing resulted in Harbhajan being banned for the remainder of the season, along with a five-match ODI suspension imposed by the BCCI for the slap.
Harbhajan further commented that, had he been in Modi’s shoes, he would have refrained from releasing such sensitive footage.
"Bringing up events from 18 years ago publicly—I'm perplexed by the intent behind it. It would have been more prudent for it to remain undisclosed. I am at a loss for their reasoning in releasing the video—perhaps they were under some influence or simply acting foolishly. If I were in their position, I would have ensured that no such video was made public," he concluded.