BCCI revises list of contracted players

[Chandan]

What is the point of this anyway? I mean the players get paid for every Test match, LOI, 20/20 they play, is it not? So why this 50/35/30 lacks etc?? By the way does anyone know what is the income per test and LOI for an Indian player these days?

Lurker, Didn't expect this question from you. Players are payed peanuts in the matches they play, ie tests or ODIs. The contracted guys get 1.5 lakhs/ODI and 2.5 lacks/test. You think their sweating out for the whole year, virtually living in the suitcases throughout their career, not caring for injuries, playing in pain, away from their young families is worth this only? Don't they need any finacial security? What will happen if a pace bowler gets injured while trying to bowl flat out for his country and is ruled out for next 6-10 months? Will he stay without any money all along? Why would a player try hard for his country then, risking injuries? A contract is extremely necessary to keep the player free from this thought and to make him try his best for the country. Didn't we see an upsurge in the team's performance since 2002 when the central contracts were introduced? But since 2005 everything has been ruined because of once again a tumultous administration of BCCI which is finding an opportunity to take the players 10 years back, scrap their contracts and make them financially insecure, excessive politics, lack of direction and every bad things that you name!

[Lurker]

You think their sweating out for the whole year, virtually living in the suitcases throughout their career, not caring for injuries, playing in pain, away from their young families is worth this only? Don't they need any finacial security? What will happen if a pace bowler gets injured while trying to bowl flat out for his country and is ruled out for next 6-10 months? Will he stay without any money all along? Why would a player try hard for his country then, risking injuries?

Chandan. You raise a good point about a player's financial security. I do not neccessarily agree with the thought of a player not giving 100% for his country if he is not paid right though. I mean players of yesteryears did it. And so do non-cricketing players in the country. If the money was the driving force for all of them our Sporting history would be zero except for the current crop of players. However a question that I have in mind now is - Do Indian players have any jobs or a means of profession? I have to ask that because even 10-15 years back a lot of players, if not all, played for a certain bank or a business conglomerate. I definitely remember a lot of Indian cricketers turning up for Businesses like SBI, TATA Steel, Mafatlal, Chemplast etc etc. They had a job and they also played cricket as and when needed. What is the situation right now? I know a few players did work sometime back. I remember reading how Harbhajan Singh got promoted(Punjab Police perhaps?) after his stint against Aussies and Dhoni also getting a promotion in Railways. My thinking is this. If BCCI asks a player NOT to take a full-time job then it surely is responsbile for the player's financial security. However if there is no such binding and players have a job then what is the need for this blanket? If SRT is not smart enough to get a job(he barely passed his matriculation) why should be given the security blanket? I mean the chap makes billions as it is! In the end it may very well boil down to the fact that BCCI is a cash cow. They are sitting on 300 crores(or was it 3000?) and even if they pay players 30 crores off it that is still only 10% of the loot. Considering fans, media pay to watch the players and NOT the Bordes and Pawars of this world it is perhaps only fair that money goes to the players in some form. xxx

[yoda]

How absurd. Laxman should simply retire. He has been humiliated far too often. Irfan over Zak means this grading system is done by a bunch of retards.

[Chandan]

Chandan. You raise a good point about a player's financial security. I do not neccessarily agree with the thought of a player not giving 100% for his country if he is not paid right though. I mean players of yesteryears did it. And so do non-cricketing players in the country. If the money was the driving force for all of them our Sporting history would be zero except for the current crop of players. However a question that I have in mind now is - Do Indian players have any jobs or a means of profession? I have to ask that because even 10-15 years back a lot of players, if not all, played for a certain bank or a business conglomerate. I definitely remember a lot of Indian cricketers turning up for Businesses like SBI, TATA Steel, Mafatlal, Chemplast etc etc. They had a job and they also played cricket as and when needed. What is the situation right now? I know a few players did work sometime back. I remember reading how Harbhajan Singh got promoted(Punjab Police perhaps?) after his stint against Aussies and Dhoni also getting a promotion in Railways. My thinking is this. If BCCI asks a player NOT to take a full-time job then it surely is responsbile for the player's financial security. However if there is no such binding and players have a job then what is the need for this blanket? If SRT is not smart enough to get a job(he barely passed his matriculation) why should be given the security blanket? I mean the chap makes billions as it is! In the end it may very well boil down to the fact that BCCI is a cash cow. They are sitting on 300 crores(or was it 3000?) and even if they pay players 30 crores off it that is still only 10% of the loot. Considering fans, media pay to watch the players and NOT the Bordes and Pawars of this world it is perhaps only fair that money goes to the players in some form. xxx

Lurker, Don't think the players (all of them ) have got a job. Fo example, take Munaf. He has come from a village. What job can he do? Nor does he do any endorsements. So what is his financial security? Our cricket is in such a bad shape because we don't pay our FC cricketers. There is so much politics to bring a player in the national team because then only he can earn something substantial and if he hasn't come totally on merit, a number of people would like to have a slice of the money earnt by him. You take the example of any country who are playing good cricket: Australia has 25 contracted players plus each state gives contracts to its FC cricketers. Same in England. Why do you think the WIPA have so much dispute with its board? Its again the financial issue. NZ: again the players are contracted. Contract is extremely necessary and our yesteryear cricketers had nothing to write home about. Still the corruption and board politics was not as much as it is now because from politicians to businessmen to anyone wants to have the money earnt by the board. Who has earnt this money? Players! And they wouldn't get even financial security??? That is absolutely ridiculous to even think. I think the board should give contract to at least 30 players in which few should be there with an eye on future. But to expect this kind of planning is from BCCI is just wishful thinking.

[Chandan]

I do not neccessarily agree with the thought of a player not giving 100% for his country if he is not paid right though. I mean players of yesteryears did it. And so do non-cricketing players in the country. If the money was the driving force for all of them our Sporting history would be zero except for the current crop of players.

Also Lurker, why were our old players such terrible fielders? Why were they such unfit bunch? Because they didn't care. Any diving could have resulted in injury. Why did the world lose so many players for few years in WSC? Have you thought about that?

[The Outsider]

I can't believe Laxman is being treated this shabbily day after day, year after year. The guy has been averaging 50 since he started playing in the middle order despite all the kick in the shins he keeps on receiving at every possible occasion and he gets treated like an absolute nobody.

[Lurker]

Also Lurker, why were our old players such terrible fielders? Why were they such unfit bunch? Because they didn't care. Any diving could have resulted in injury. Why did the world lose so many players for few years in WSC? Have you thought about that?

Chandan, If you talk of old players I don't think Indian fielding was that bad. I mean you can argue that today it is just that way bit better(thanks perhaps to the huge impact of LOI) but otherwise Indian fielders were fairly decent. Take for example the 70's. We had excellent fielders in Venkatraghvan, Abid Ali, Eknath Solkar etc. These were as good as any in the world. Fielders like Gavaskar, Amarnath, Ghavri were safe in the least and Farokh Engineer and Syed Kirmani were as good as any other behind the stumps. I would say that Indian spin bowlers - Bedi, Prasanna, Chandra, were the real culprits. But otherwise Indian fielding was fairly decent. If you move to 80's I suppose this decade was the best as far as Indian fielding has ever been, as clearly suggested by the sheer amount of tournament we won. 1983 WC, 1985 World Championship of Cricket, Rothman's trophy, Asian Cup you name it. In 1983 we had Kapil Dev, easily India's most complete fielder alongside Azharuddin, we had Srikkant, we had Madan Lal, Amarnath, Sunny Gavaskar(who may be the only player to win MOM for his fielding which he did when India were skittled for 125 and came back to dismiss Pakistan for 90 odds at Sharjah with sunny taking 4 catches if I am not mistaken), we had Kirmani who won the best keeper prize in 1983 WC, even the second string of fielders like Yashpal Sharma, Kirti Azaad, Binny etc were fairly decent. So I do not think Indian fieldeing has improved in past 20-30 years, in fact pound for pound I would say it has deteriorated. I mean how can a team with Kumble, Ganguly, Munaf, VVS even remotely claim to be good? xxxx

[The Outsider]

Kal raat ki utri nahin kya, Lurker? Blaming me more some one else's sins.:P Waise, I agree with your post.

[Lurker]

^^^ hahaha..sorry mate, pata nahin kaise fisal gaya..

[gator]

the reason for Lax's demotion is very simple... you simply cannot have 4 middle order batters of whom none are allrounders when u have a bowling attack as weak as india.... it is unfair for yuvi too... if clarkey could get so many chances in a strong aussie batting lineup, yuvi should have been given an extended run after scoring overseas centuries....