If Abhinav Bindra can, why can’t MS Dhoni and Harbhajan Singh?

Why do cricketers want to chicken out of the anti-doping test?
All the athletes and cricketers around the world have agreed to World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) norms and the whereabouts clause. Then I don't understand why the cricketers should have any problems about disclosing their whereabouts. Sometimes, we boxers are expected to give our dope tests at odd hours as well. We need to trust the World Anti-Doping Agency as they would be careful about vital details like the players’ location. If shooter Abhinav Bindra and former badminton player P Gopichand among many, don't have any problems with the code and the 'whereabouts' clause, then why should some cricketers have qualms and security concerns if they had to reveal their location in advance?
—Vijender Singh, won a bronze medal in the 2008 Olympic in Beijing

I too wouldn't like to disclose my location
I don't know how practical this anti-doping code will be for our cricketers keeping in mind the kind of traveling they do and the security they have because of the threats they face. It's not possible to disclose the whereabouts of the cricketers. And there is not much clarity on what is the procedure and how will the ICC send someone to keep a tab on the cricketers. It doesn't seem a feasible option at all. There can be random checks on cricketers before a major event like the Champion Trophy or the World Cup etc. Ultimately, it boils down to doping and the cricketers don't have any objects if there are test that our conducted but this is something that even I don't agree with and completely support the BCCI.
The reason why ICC's anti-doping code is followed by other countries is simply because they don't have the kind of threats the Indian cricketers face. It is not that they shouldn't be tested; I am against the clause regarding the disclosing of their destination. As a cricketer, even I would not like to tell my whereabouts of 90 days, if I was asked to.  
—Anshuman Gaekwad, former India player and coach

BCCI should adopt WADA
I t is important to know what senior players’ like Sachin Tendulkar have to say on this issue. The whereabouts clause in the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) code would ensure that the team manger  and other authorities are aware about the whereabouts of the players. This would make tracing them simpler in case of any emergency. The BCCI, as well as the team manager, need to be informed about the player's location. What about the security measures when they go for the shoots for advertisements? Do they keep the team manager and the concerned authorities informed when they go to shoot for the plenty advertisements? 
—Bipin Dani, senior cricket journalist

ICC has power to penalise players
I don't think it is right to oppose the whereabouts clause of WADA that has been accepted by more than 500 international sports organisations. If the sportsmen in other countries have not raised an objection than why are the Indian cricketers making a big noise? I think this is an appropriate clause as it will promote fair game. I don't find anything wrong in accepting the ICC's anti-doping code. ICC may later take action like penalising Indian players for failing to submit to the new anti-doping norms in time.
—Viniet Mehta, student 

I support the BCCI’s decision completely
I would support the BCCI and think that BCCI in some way is justified to reject the controversial whereabouts clause of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). The WADA code has been accepted by 571 sporting bodies but our cricketers do stand a risk regarding revealing details about their locations for three months in advance. Our cricketers, who are treated as celebrities and have huge fan following, are already on the hit-list of terrorists. MS Dhoni has even received threats in the past. So there are chances of the security being breached with the revelation of the details. This particular
clause also violates the Indian Constitution which upholds the right to privacy.
—Mitesh Bora, web designer 

Cricketers too must agree to the clause
WADA would want Indian cricketers and the BCCI to understand and cooperate with the ICC to enforce the World Anti-Doping Code. The BCCI as well as our cricketers do have their reasons but at the end of the day all sportspersons need to comply with the World Anti-Doping Agency.
However, if the cricketers remain adamant and don't agree then it could lead to a lot of speculation and unnecessary controversy. If the same ‘whereabouts clause’ has been accepted by Federer, Nadal and also Abhinav Bindra, Anju Bobby  George and P Gopichand then why do the cricketers have to object? If other top athletes don’t have a problem I don't see why the cricketers can't agree to the clause.
—Lianne Pirerra, teacher

The clause invades a player’s privacy
I think it is good that BCCI has rejected the anti-doping code of ICC. It is definitely an invasion of privacy and it is actually a violation of our fundamental right. Further, by signing the anti-doping code the security of the players will enhance the loopholes as the information can be leaked out. This firm move also shows that BCCI is concerned about the player's security and is paying heed to the concerns shown by cricketers like Yuvraj Singh and MS Dhoni. I think that other countries may be having similar apprehensions but probably were lacking courage to come forward and express their opinion. I am sure this step will correct the anti-doping code and will benefit the other sportsmen too.
—Yogesh Deshpande, businessman

Certain norms need to be followed
 don't find anything wrong with the whereabouts clause. Security can be maintained even while disclosing the location of the cricketers. You think these people who are threatening them don't know where they live? We all know where Sachin Tendulkar stays and who are his neighbours. Why isn't anyone questioning the security now? It's a norm that is being followed by other countries and I think India should also follow it. Let's not make a big hue and cry about it. There are certain rules that need
to be adhered to, so why only a few selected cricketers have a problem with the clause?  
—Ankita Sood, associate software engineer