BCCI's central contracts for 2012-13 announced

[saket123]

$ 93K for being Grade B... that's pretty healthy in US.. and ultra healthy in India.

[ganeshran]

C grade retainers are 25 lakhs which is not a big amount for BCCI. Plus it motivates players to work harder to cement their spot in the squad and work their way up to a better contract.

[Number]

IMO BCCI is wasting money

Nothing wrong with rewarding players, politicians in Cricket administration gulping a fat lot of money should be cut to less.

[Stuge]

don;t get excited over these contracts this just a token amount ,.

[putrevus]

He's finished. Almost 30, injured, poor record and not even given a C grade contract for India. What will DTW do now when he returns?

who is DTW???

[Sidhoni]

who is DTW???

His original username is Dravid The Wall, but he is the biggest Sree fanatic you could ever imagine. Many wonder if he is Sreesanth himself in disguise!

[1983-2011]

BCCI Contracts: Too much easy money even for non-performers

MUMBAI: Virender Sehwag has scored just 612 runs in his last 11 Tests. He has three ducks, five fifties and his last Test century came two years ago against New Zealand. His last Test hundred outside the sub-continent came at Adelaide in January 2008. His opening partner Gautam Gambhir hasn't scored a Test hundred in his last 22 Tests and averages a shocking 28.36 in that period. Yet, both have been retained in Grade A of the contracts' list which fetches them a cool Rs. 1 crore a year. What adds to the mystery is the fact that both batsmen have not been in peak fitness for a long period. Suresh Raina's name too figures in category A and we all know what he has achieved in Test cricket, rather what he hasn't. After a mediocre year for Indian cricket to say the least, the BCCI had a great chance to send the players a strong message that non-performance will not be tolerated. But, what they have done with the contracts for the 2012-2013 season, is exactly the reverse. Apart from R Ashwin, who has rightfully replaced Harbhajan Singh in the A category and Virat Kohli, who has been sensational with his form in the past 15 months, there is not one name that deserves to be in the top list. In fact, barring Kohli and MS Dhoni, no batsman in Grade A, has scored a Test hundred in the last 18 months. And what of Grade B? How does a Rohit Sharma, who has been in woeful touch with the bat, qualify to be retained and earn 50 lakhs per year. However, seeing Irfan Pathan's name in Grade B, is a good thing as the all-rounder and left-arm-seamer has impressed since being recalled to the side. Offering 20 cricketers 25 lakhs in Grade C is baffling. A contracted Indian cricketer is a matter of pride and it is not a privilege that should be available easily. That's where the BCCI needs to learn from Cricket Australia and the England and Wales Cricket Board. Only a selected group of players are handed contracts and every year good performances are rewarded with incremental contracts. The group of centrally contracted cricketers hardly goes up above 10. What the large number of contracts does is make the fringe cricketers, already spoiled by the riches that the Indian Premier League has to offer, slip into a comfort zone, rather than be determined to make the cut. It would have also been nice if the Board had rewarded selected cricketers from the India U-19 World Cup winning side and the top run-scorer in Ranji Trophy ( Robin Bist), with at least a Grade C contract, instead of keeping cricketers who have done nothing of note in domestic as well as international cricket in that list.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/top-stories/BCCI-Contracts-Too-much-easy-money-even-for-non-performers/articleshow/16970684.cms I don't think the players even give a crap about these central contracts, they earn much more from 7 weeks of IPL and few endorsements.

[BeautifulGame]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/top-stories/BCCI-Contracts-Too-much-easy-money-even-for-non-performers/articleshow/16970684.cms I don't think the players even give a crap about these central contracts, they earn much more from 7 weeks of IPL and few endorsements.

Plainly retarded article.Not surprising its from TOI though

[GautiMaan]

Not totally retarded though,if Viru or Gauti had been demoted,it would have sent a message,but looks like they wanted to play it safe

[Sachin=GOD]

Plainly retarded article.Not surprising its from TOI though

why exactly do you find the article retarded?

[saneindian]

As usual TOI writing crap.They want BCCI to learn from ECB and CA in giving these central contracts to a smaller group of players particularly asking for doing away C grade contracts. Not sure if the writer knows that in England and Australia, domestic players also get a contract from their respective county/state sides besides getting the match fees for domestic matches. Does a similar system exist in India? Nopes, most of our domestic players reply on the match fees from domestic season to keep them going during the off season. Don't see anything wrong in having a bigger pool of players centrally contracted.

[Sachin=GOD]

As usual TOI writing crap.They want BCCI to learn from ECB and CA in giving these central contracts to a smaller group of players particularly asking for doing away C grade contracts. Not sure if the writer knows that in England and Australia' date=' domestic players also get a contract from their respective county/state sides besides getting the match fees for domestic matches. Does a similar system exist in India? Nopes,[b'] most of our domestic players reply on the match fees from domestic season to keep them going during the off season. Don't see anything wrong in having a bigger pool of players centrally contracted.

you're talking as if these players (the 37 who have got a central contract this year) don't play Tamasha krikut and don't earn crores from that.

[Number]

you're talking as if these players (the 37 who have got a central contract this year) don't play Tamasha krikut and don't earn crores from that.

That's franchise money not BCCI's.

[skindia]

Robin uthappa not among top 37 players..LOL he is good in odi but not getting chances. he is still better than rohit sharma,parthiv patel,murali vijay,dinesh kartik in the list.

[skindia]

anyway he is getting crores through IPL more than some mediocre players in list.

[Texy]

Why the eff does Abhimanyu Mithun still has a contract? Yusuf Pathan is one lucky mofo. Making so much money without having to perform year after year...

[Feed]

A serious look at the BCCI contracts list --The arithmetic of ABC The list the BCCI released last week seems to not-so-subtly suggest that performance is incidental to seniority and, in more recent times, which IPL team you play for, when it comes to deciding who’s in and where they figure in the ABC of contract arithmetic. More... Virat Kohli and value for money Anjali Doshi · Oct 30, 2012 · BCCI's list of contracted players seems to suggest that performance is incidental to seniority, something Virat Kohli may have reason to be annoyed about. I wonder whether Virat Kohli was paying attention on Friday evening when the BCCI revealed its list of contracted players for the forthcoming season. Was he slightly peeved when he saw some of the nine names that feature in the top bracket, or did he shrug his shoulders and decide not to care since that’s all he can do about it anyway? It’s been Kohli’s best year in international cricket in all formats of the game, a year that has coincided rather dramatically with the abject failure of several of his teammates. But the list the BCCI released last week seems to not-so-subtly suggest that performance is incidental to seniority and, in more recent times, which IPL team you play for, when it comes to deciding who’s in and where they figure in the ABC of contract arithmetic. The intention is not to pick on individuals and single them out for non-performance but questions need to be asked of the BCCI about players who continue to retain top billing despite a terrible year, or two in some cases. The media, however, seems to have stopped asking these questions. As surprising as the list is the way it’s been reported, without much analysis or inquiry. Is it enough to say ‘Ashwin Promoted, Harbhajan Demoted’ or ‘BCCI Announces New Central Contracts’ in matter-of-fact fashion, bereft of any perspective when it comes to assessing the BCCI’s annual review of the country’s top talent? Not too long ago, the annual contracts were a big story, not just by way of a big deal between the BCCI and the players but news of significant importance to reporters on the beat. Introduced during Jagmohan Dalmiya’s tenure as board president in 2004, it had taken nearly three years of intense dialogue between the senior players, including Sachin Tendulkar, Anil Kumble, Sourav Ganguly and Rahul Dravid, and the BCCI, to work out the grades, the amounts, the list of players and the terms. And the annual contracts were reported in much detail and accompanied by a thorough appraisal of the BCCI’s decisions in keeping with the players’ performance that year. So why has the media stopped caring about who figures where and why? Is it because the list is delivered straight to our inboxes that we now take it for granted and have reduced it to a footnote in the cricket stories of the day? Is it because every story, especially on news television, is a breaking story and the priority is merely to get the news out without providing any real context, proper perspective or profound thought? Or is it simply just this? Who cares about the plain economics of players’ annual contracts when you have the freakonomics of the IPL? After all, what is a crore [ten million] a year compared to the far more sexy story of player auctions culminating in 12-crore deals for six weeks? And that’s just the official figure. The IPL auctions are a story for which newsrooms plan days in advance with well-designed graphics, a battery of experts and minute-by-minute analysis. The vast sums on offer in the IPL seem to have blindsided not just the players but the media as well. Coming back to the players’ annual contracts, the BCCI, incidentally, is the only board to reveal what each player will be paid. For a board that is otherwise so cloak and dagger in its approach, it’s surprising that it has no qualms about sharing details when it comes to the players’ contracts. But that’s where it stops because no questions at all are entertained on the confabulations and criteria that determine this list. Just as no answers are provided on matters of selection, glaring cases of conflict of interest, or updates on players’ injuries. A couple of years ago, a journalist friend made the mistake of asking N Srinivasan, then BCCI secretary and now President, about the contracts since there were a few deserving names that did not make the grade and some rather curious selections. He was promptly slapped with this reply, “Why are you interested in the players’ contracts? Do we ask you what you earn and how you negotiate?” Right, that settles it then. ‘Ask no questions, be told no lies’ is increasingly the board’s motto when it comes to dealing with the media. The BCCI has the right to remain silent. And we don’t dare question that.

[Crookbond]

I doubt these contracts are of importance any more especially if you are an iPL player.

[Chandan]

I doubt these contracts are of importance any more especially if you are an iPL player.

It should because: Why the Indian Premier League is a bubble waiting to burst

[yoda]

I don't understand why we have to follow CA or ECB in terms of limiting the number of contracted players. BCCI's approach seems to be that all players who are in contention for a National team spot are under contract, which seems fine.