It’s the streamlining of the flow of money, ensuring that it is not detrimental to the performance of the player/team that should be the concern of the Board.
Bangladesh’s upset victory over South Africa on Sunday should also put India’s defeat against the same team in the first phase of the World Cup in perspective. This is what sport is all about; the uncertainties of this great game, the vicissitudes of fortune spare none — not even the number one ranked team in the world.
The pain and disappointment of India’s early ouster from the tournament was stark, but cannot be allowed to linger longer than is necessary. India played badly, period. But the road ahead is surely more important than what’s happened in the past. There’s no way to walk this path without a rapprochement between the BCCI and the players.
The BCCI has already demonstrated its tough intent by the series of measures announced on Saturday. The one which seeks to regulate endorsements got the most prominence because it was the most populist, but if this is not seen in conjunction with several others, the whole exercise is meaningless.
I believe a non-zonal selection committee, rapid development of junior cricket, and sporting pitches across the country will be as important in the long run. These should change the tenor and culture of the sport in the country; this really is the fundamental issue, not individuals.
The BCCI must set these plans in motion asap. Too often in the past, the establishment has reacted with hostility to defeat, but with utter lethargy in implementing measures to set right the basics.
Meanwhile, there is the matter of player endorsements to tackle. It is bound to be contentious because the issue is more than just cricket; it has also to do with restraint of trade, fundamental rights. Any draconian measures would also be out of sync with the laissez faire policy that the rest of the country is pursuing.
Clauses in endorsement contracts which promote ‘selfishness’ are obviously unacceptable. The amount of time spent in doing ads just prior to a tour/series could reasonably be construed to be intrusive. But whether player A gets three times more endorsements than player B, is nobody’s concern. In a free market situation, demand and money would correct itself on performance.
How much money players earn is not the real issue. It’s the streamlining of the flow of money, ensuring that it is not detrimental to the performance of the player/team that should be the concern of the Board.
An open dialogue with players — say seniors like Dravid, Tendulkar, Kumble, Ganguly — would help resolve this issue amicably. I would also recommend aggressive mentoring of juniors about the role that money is likely to play in their lives when they graduate to the senior level.
That might help in developing well-rounded individuals who not only have exciting cricketing skills but also a decent understanding of life. The biggest lesson taught at this stage should be that there is no place for non-performing assets in Indian cricket.
In many ways, isn’t that what the anger of the Board, the anguish of the people really trying to address?
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}