Sam Perry

At least that question pertaining to Shubman's relationships went away.

You know what I mean?

So, yeah.

Would I be right in summarising, and I may have this wrong, but like the BCCI would like to see, you know, like partners in wedlock if they're to enter the hotel to have the binding contract of marriage.

Yeah.

The economic institution of marriage.

That's right.

Without wedlock, no entry to the hotel, et cetera.

Frowned upon.

I wonder if it would be frowned upon versus strictly outlawed.

Like you're going to have to show a marriage certificate or a ring.

If a partner or a prospective partner walks into a hotel, there'll be a BCCI official, show us your ring, you know, show us your marriage certificate, right?

And it's only unmarried people that do that.

But like I just wanted to know, and this is more of an open question to the audience, but like are de facto relationships protected under Indian law?

And to what extent are de facto relationships therefore protected when it comes to this crackdown on partnerships?

the administration's always shown themselves to be two or three cars ahead because I know when I've experienced from afar, that is, by observation, wife swapping at clubs, I've known one club to actually bring a sports chaplain in too.

No, that's legit.

A sports chaplain has to come in to, I guess, untangle the myriad issues that occur when people start swapping wives.

Yeah.

But as I say that, I realize that they're in wedlock, so they would be protected at the IPL, these players.