The much-hyped player contracts are a two-paced wicket for the Board of Control for Cricket in India. When it comes to signing the contracts, other issues slow the move. But when it comes to a more populist move like deducting match fees for non-performance, the BCCI coolly fast-forwards the process.
Thus, according to the BCCI's pay-per-performance policy enshrined in the contracts, Indian cricketers will be docked 50 per cent of their salaries for their defeats against the West Indies and New Zealand in the one-day series. Never mind the minor detail of actually signing the contracts to make them operational.
Each member of the Indian team is paid Rs 2.5 lakh [approximately US$5200] per Test match and Rs 2.25 lakh [$4700] per one-day international. With four defeats against the West Indies and six in all against New Zealand, the players stand to lose close to Rs 12 lakh each.
BCCI treasurer Kishore Rungta said, "It is a simple case as per the policy we implemented in June before the team went to England. The team won the Headingley Test and their match fees were doubled; likewise for the victory against South Africa in the ICC Champions Trophy."
This, indeed, is in keeping with the new contracts, which propose a carrot-and-stick policy with players getting a bonus for victory, but losing 50 per cent of their match fees in case of a defeat. Except that the contracts have not been made operational yet.
The proposals were sent to the players for approval through Anil Kumble, who had been coordinating with the BCCI on behalf of the team since the idea of contracts and a graded payment system was floated in late 2001.
On June 19 last year, BCCI president Jagmohan Dalmiya said, "We plan to implement the new system by October [2002] or even before that, though a final decision will be taken only after the response from the players is received." The new system was to be put in place before the start of the West Indies tour of India in October.
The West Indies have come and gone, and India's tour of New Zealand is in its last phase, but there is yet no sign of the player contracts being implemented.
Dalmiya had said the proposed system would be the first of its kind, incorporating both the bonus and penalty clauses. But he had emphasized that the board would enforce the system only after a consensus with the players was reached.
There was none.
Brushing aside criticism from certain quarters of the proposal to dock the match fees of all players for a defeat, Dalmiya had argued, "The system offers a bonus to the players for good performance and no bonus comes without a penalty. Even the players' commercial contracts have penalty clauses."
Asked about implementing the player contracts in toto, Rungta shot back that the issue would be taken up after the World Cup. "We have to deal with the ICC contracts issue through third-party intervention and make sure that we reach a conclusion in the players' favour," he argued.
So even as the BCCI purports to fight for the players' rights, it refuses to implement its own policy on contracts, preferring to do it piecemeal. Of course, niceties like how players' fees can be deducted without the contracts system being first put in place don't trouble the board. Public sentiment is against the side, which is in the midst of a tour gone terribly off beam, and for the BCCI that's enough 'incentive' to crack the whip to show that it means business.
The Contracts Row: Complete coverage
Illustration: Utttam Ghosh
