Team India has suddenly lost the warm cuddle in it's oft-repeated huddle, and the big hand of large bucks is once again rearing its ugly hyra-head. There seems to be clear confusion in terms of the gradation structure, fixed retainer amounts, and several imponderables which are naturally resulting in loss of team togetherness
I am attempting to address the subject by recommending solutions unravel the intricacies inherent in the subject.
- Why are the Indian players being asked to revert back to BCCI in terms of grading structure and amounts allocated per grade?
This is like corporate management throwing salary pool to employees, and asking them to revert with a formula for income distribution , promotions and incentives. This is solely BCCI?s prerogative, and by asking players to handle it entirely themselves, there will be inevitable accusations of each group of players believing they are in opposite camps to share the same pie. This could lead to serious negative repercussions in terms of team bonding, and mutual trust.
Solution : BCCI should deal exclusively only with the Players Association.
- How is it fair that Some star players should get more of the retainer fees, when they are already bagging endorsement contracts, which are large multiples of their match fees? Isn?t it like having the cake and eating it too?
Shouldn?t the grading be done on performance alone instead of attaching weights to seniority? Is it not possible that new entrant Irfan Pathan makes it into the A category within the first year --- no disputes, no challenges, just pure facts based on statistical truths. Such a system must reduce capricious subjectivity and whimsical decision-making.
Solution : While giving due weightage to past performance, the end result in pay-out should not be actually skewed.
- Why should there be any difference between the playing eleven and those ?benched? ?
The suggested 50% deduction of the ?benched? players match fee is blatantly unfair. There should be no difference at all. When a team is selected to play, each and every one is deemed to have an equal opportunity to be part of the playing eleven. Is it Sanjay Bangar?s fault that he was not played in the World Cup? Should he be asked to refund a certain portion of his earnings? If Tendulkar or Ganguly are injured for a match, should they be deducted 50% of their match fees for the same? Attaching a commercial value here is akin to a suicidal trip. It will harm team spirit incalculably.
Solution : The entire team should be paid the same match fee.
- Who should be in the Committee approving the nominations to Grades ?
The BCCI should involve a team of 5 individuals in eminent positions to decide on who qualifies to be in which grade on an annual basis. The norms should be as far as possible scientific, and a near-formula can be worked out using Performance Ratings, approved by a well known consulting firm, thus eliminating bias altogether.
Solution : Establish a scientific ratings formula for performance for the program. The 5 nominated people must include a senior retired cricketer, a member of Player?s Association, an eminent citizen and 2 members of BCCI.
- Give more money in the Pension Plan
The current crop of cricketers become overnight millionaires once they feature in an international match; fair enough, you cannot grudge them their rising bank balances as they are fortuitously in a marketing boom from ad apenders. But can?t we at least redress the yawning imbalances between the modern day Richie Rich sorts and the great heroes of the past, many of whom are living in highly regrettable pecuniary conditions ?
Solution : While the decision to give a monthly allowance of Rs. 5,000/- was at least a token beginning, this should be enhanced to Rs. 10,000/- for the 172 individuals , and yet it will increase the budgetar outlay by a mere Rs. 8,60,000/- only.
Invest in Insurance
BCCI must ensure players for reasonably comfortable amounts especially regarding threatening injuries, and other contingencies etc. This should prevent the recurring apprehensions that players have regarding taking that little extra dive while fielding, or hiding injuries etc.
- Have only 2 grades and choose 15 players initially
By making grades of A, B, C & D (?) this multi-tiered, we only run the risk of further aggravating fissures within the team. Some players may feel this might even affect their perceived market value. Further, the more the subjective elements and structural ambiguity, the higher the scope for political machinations. In India, we specialize in creating systems that we can leisurely exploit for mind games and petty internecine warfare.
Solution : Have only 2 grades, A and B. And the pay-out A-55 Lacs, B-45 Lacs. While there is clear recognition for the better performers, the differential amount won?t make the grade B feel like poor third cousin. Isn?t cricket finally a team game ? Isnt that what Sachin, Rahul, Sourav, Anil and Sehwag mutter with chronic consistency at post match briefs ? So why create an embarrassingly high division in emoluments ? And choose only 15 players for the Annual Contracts.
- Make playing Ranji Trophy etc. mandatory -
The BCCI should make all the Contracted players give an unconditional undertaking that they will compulsorily and without fail play in ALL the major domestic tournaments; Ranji, Duleep , Challenger and Irani Trophies etc. The superstars are too busy doing make-up and rehearsing script instead of playing with their lesser brethren in comparatively low profile matches. While the ICC is globalizing cricket, we in India have made the domestic cricket scene a pitiable apology of a tournament. The superstars are not necessarily infinitely better than several domestic players who never get a rightful opportunity.
Solution : Domestic tournaments MUST have compulsory attendance by players.
- Increase fees for domestic matches
While the fee for Ranji Trophy has been recently upped to Rs. 35,000 there is a strong case to enhance it further , as many of the youngsters are often jobless. Further, with the superstars compulsorly playing domestic cricket ( as suggested in this piece), the per match fee should be raised to Rs. 50,000.
Solution : The increased hike will result in greater economic security and higher competitiveness.
- Give them a benefit match
The BCCI should ensure that all international players who retire are given a official game as a benefit match ( most will prefer an ODI) within the first year of their retirement , when public memory is still quite high to ensure a good turn-out and sponsor support.
- Raise minimum eligibility criteria, Increase Incentive, but there should be No disincentive
Since the Contracted players have a significant commercial earning, the eligibility criteria should be raised to 5 Tests and 15 ODIs instead of 3 tests and 10 ODIs as currently envisaged, so as to make the entry into the haloed group a lot more challenging.
While it is a good idea to double match fees (it is positive motivation) when beating a team higher in ICC rankings, it will not be appropriate and just to deduct match fees by 50% when they suffer a loss.
Reduce Match Fees, and Pay more for Tests, less for ODIs
For test Matches --- Rs. 2.25 lacs match fee
For ODIs --- Rs. 1.25 lacs match fee
The BCCI should make the Contract system performance driven, transparent, a motivational vehicle and encouraging greater team cohesiveness. The suggestions given above if incorporated, will address all of the aforementioned objectives
Is BCCI listening?
