A question of answers

Prem Panicker

For a few days now, we have on this forum been batting, back and forth, the whole concept of contracts for players.

As far as we can see, the debate boils down to two contradictory lines of thought. Which, spelt out, read: (1) It is necessary for reform to begin at the grassroots level and (2) Given the large number of associations in the country -- 27, at last count -- such reform, from the grassroots level, is impossible to enforce in the immediate future.

Therefore, the thinking runs, let's give contracts to national players, keep our fingers crossed, hope it works and, building on that hope, hope further that a properly functioning system of central contracts will in turn persuade the state associations to implement similar models on their own respective turfs.

Now that seems a rather clumsy way to run this man's army. Worse, it merely increases the disparity between the rich and the poor -- or, in this case, between the national players and regional ones.

If we are talking reform, why not go the whole hog?

For starters, shall we agree that at this point in time, there are 27 associations participating in the Ranji Trophy format? And further, that this means a minimum of 405 players playing at the highest national level? Will you, then, stay with us on this line of thought and agree that of the 405, there would be at the very optimistic about 120-135 players who can conceivably play to the same (or reasonably close to) the standards obtaining in other countries at that level?

If you agree with that, then what we are saying is that we have an unwieldly domestic system, geared to perpetuate mediocrity. Reform, thus, would need to start from this level.

So -- how about this? Using the principle of highest bidders, eight corporate entities are picked, and given permission to form their own clubs. It will be the responsibility of these clubs to hire players, from across the country (there will be no regional bar on hiring -- thus, a Madras based club is not debarred from hiring say a Delhi-based player). Further, each club will be given one stadium as home ground.

Given that the national league in future will be played out between these clubs, the corporates will obviously take great care to go around the country, trawling for the best available talent. Further, it will be the responsibility of the corporates to maintain the grounds allotted to them -- which automatically ensures 8 state of the art cricket centres in the country.

If we implement this, we have then 8 high quality teams taking part in domestic competition. The corporates would be employing these players, and this in turn means that the careers of the top 120 or so players in the country (excluding the national players) is taken care of.

Simultaneously, the BCCI will place 20 players on national contract -- these twenty being, in the view of the selectors, the players who can be expected to play for the country during the season.

At this point, what do we have? A hugely competitive domestic tournament, which by its very nature will place a premium on performance (It would obviously be hugely prestigious for the corporates concerned to win the national title, and therefore they will go flat out, providing the best of training facilities for the players, ensuring that the wickets and grounds are conducive to result-oriented games, and so on). A competition of that sort will in turn hone the players to top potential -- the presence of high quality domestic performers automatically putting pressure on those in the nationally contracted list to perform and ensure that they keep their places.

Look at the advantage to the BCCI -- without investing a single penny, they have ensured that 8 top quality stadiums are maintained in the country, and that a pool of 120-odd performers are kept in a state of permanent readiness for the step up.

So what does that leave the local associations with? Why, again, simple -- the associations are left with close to 90 lakh apiece, and no Ranji teams to spend it on. Which logically means that the associations can now use that money to improve the standards of the domestic league -- the first step in the feeder chain that services the national team. Today, first division league players pay out of their pocket to play. Get their costs reimbursed, kits provided, and a certain amount of pocket money given to them by the associations, and playing league cricket suddenly becomes an attractive proposition.

Good performances at the league levels will obviously be what corporates look at, when hunting for fresh talent. Thus, the chain begins at the grassroots, and goes all the way to the top.

What is wrong with such a system? You tell us.

Will such a system ever be implemented? We will tell you -- No.

Not until the present structure of the BCCI is broken. As it exists, the BCCI has a stake in keeping everything within its own control. Once it privatises the league, it will lose that control -- and that is why the Board has, in the past, reacted like a startled horse whenever the word 'privatisation' is even whispered.

Meanwhile, we will wait for your take, on the structure set out above. Have a great weekend, all....

Design: Devyani Chandwarkar