Former head coach of Pakistan’s Test team, Jason Gillespie, recently stirred controversy by alleging that the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) has failed to pay him for nine months of coaching services. In a recent interview, Gillespie stated:
“I still hold no negative feelings toward Pakistan cricket, but I haven’t been paid for the work I did. It’s certainly frustrating, but I remain hopeful that the issue will be settled in due course.
He further expressed that his time with the team ended in a disheartening manner, even making him question whether he wanted to pursue full-time coaching again.
PCB Denies Allegations, Points to Contract Breach
In response to the allegations, the PCB spokesperson firmly denied any wrongdoing. According to the board, Gillespie left his role without providing notice, which was a clear breach of contract.
“The agreement included a clause requiring both parties to give a four-month notice before termination,” said the PCB representative. “Jason Gillespie did not fulfill that obligation, which means any pending dues are actually recoverable from his side.”
Gillespie’s Agent Was Informed About the Situation
The PCB further disclosed that Gillespie’s agent had contacted the board to discuss the claims of outstanding payments. The board claims they had already responded, stating that Gillespie must first clear his contractual obligations before any financial settlement could proceed.
“We informed his agent that once Jason settles his end, any remaining payments will also be cleared accordingly,” the PCB clarified.
Previous Accusations Against Pakistan Setup
This isn’t the first time Gillespie has voiced concerns about his stint in Pakistan. Gillespie had earlier alleged that interim coach Aaqib Javed compromised his authority, a situation he said took a toll on his passion for the coaching profession.
What’s Next? Resolution in Sight?
Despite the ongoing tension, Gillespie mentioned that he still hopes for an amicable resolution to the issue. The PCB, on the other hand, appears firm in its stance that contractual terms must be honored before any dues are considered.
