Not even one year since its inception in 2008 has the Indian Premier League gone without its share of motivated criticism and complaints born more out of envy than genuine reasoning. The latest grouse about the IPL is that the 2022 edition has “forced” about half a dozen first-choice South African cricketers to skip their country’s two-Test series against Bangladesh at home to take part in a tournament that has gotten bigger and longer with the addition of two new franchises to the original eight.
The IPL has been used as a convenient punching bag to divert attention from real cricketing issues. Immediately after their Ashes humiliation at the start of the year, many former England players and a few English Board officials apportioned blame on the IPL. The argument, however, flew in the face of the detractors. After all, out of the 18 players England used in their 4-1 hammering by Australia, only four - Jonny Bairstow, Jos Buttler, Chris Woakes and Dawid Malan - were part of the last IPL. Pertinently, all of them pulled out of the second leg held in the UAE in September-October.
Interestingly, Bairstow, who played just two Ashes Tests, had the best batting average, at nearly 49, among all English batsmen while Malan was the second-highest run-getter, behind Joe Root. Even in the ongoing series against West Indies, Bairstow is second in the run-making stakes, after Root. So much for the IPL affecting Test performances.
It’s worth recalling the duplicity of some former England players insofar as talk about preserving the primacy of Test cricket is concerned. When India travelled to Old Blighty last year for a five-Test series, they had a month’s gap between the end of the World Test Championship final against New Zealand in Southampton and the start of the first Test against England. The BCCI requested the England and Wales Cricket Board to advance the series by a week so that the IPL-bound Indian and England players could return well in time to take part in the second phase in the UAE. The ECB turned down the BCCI’s suggestion as it didn’t want its ambitious project, The Hundred (an abridged version of the already abridged 20-over format), to be overshadowed by a high-profile Test series.
As fate would have it, Covid struck the Indian camp and the fifth Test in Manchester had to be postponed. It’s, therefore, a bit rich to suggest that the BCCI (alone) prioritises franchise cricket over Tests. It’s not just the pundits in the west that lament the success of the IPL. There are many within India willing to toe the western line for reasons hardly mysterious.
Coming back to the South Africans, too much is being made of the players “choosing” club over country. Patriotism is invoked and players are made to feel as if they are betraying their nation. This is not limited to South Africa. From West Indies to Australia and from India to New Zealand, cricketers are painted as greedy lot who are ready to sacrifice the interests of their country to earn quick megabucks.
Let’s not forget this. The ultimate aim of any athlete worth his/her salt is to represent their country. Nothing excites them more and nothing makes them prouder. It’s a heady high only they can experience; lesser mortals like us can only live it through them. But there’s also something called financial security, providing for their families. If the IPL ceases to exist today, it will have a major impact on the earnings of several players from India, England and Australia, but their respective cricket boards are rich enough to secure their employees’ financial futures. What about players from South Africa or West Indies or Afghanistan or Sri Lanka?
Since the issue has arisen due to the South African players’ decision to pick the IPL over Test cricket, let’s look at their earnings from their central contracts. According to the 2021-22 annual retainers, the highest-paid Protea player was Quinton de Kock, who was still playing Tests when the list of contracted players was announced. He was paid the equivalent of Rs 2.66 crore. Their premier pace bowlers, Kagiso Rabada and Lungi Ngidi, are in the bracket of Rs 1.9 crore. Anrich Nortje takes home an annual salary of Rs 57 lakh.
In the latest mega auction, de Kock went for Rs 6.75 crore to Lucknow Super Giants, Rabada for Rs 9.25 crore to Punjab Kings and Nortje was retained for Rs 6.5 crore by Delhi Capitals. Mind you, these are some of South Africa’s top players, and their two-month earnings in the IPL range from twice to 11 times their annual contracts. Further, it is worth remembering that these players didn’t defy their board, they were given NOCs by Cricket South Africa to take part in the IPL.
In an age when hectic international schedules, coupled with claustrophobic bio-secure bubbles, are shortening international careers, players are well within their right to ensure their lives are financially secured by the time they hang up their boots. In an emotionally charged even if seriously misplaced club vs country debate, we have failed to be sympathetic towards athletes’ financial stability. Unlike people who hold white-collar jobs, even the most successful sportsperson’s career is a lot shorter and if they have avenues to make extra money through legal means, why deny them that opportunity?
Also Read | Can RCB change the script?
Apart from paying 10% of each players’ successful auction bid to the home board to facilitate the issuance of no objection certificates, the BCCI hasn’t proactively tried to influence foreign boards to release their players. But on their own, they have all acknowledged the IPL’s pull and attempted to tweak their international schedules to facilitate their players’ IPL participation. New Zealand have managed it the best but Australia and South Africa haven’t been too hostile either despite a few murmurs, largely to play to the gallery. Given the times we live in and the expansion of the league, which eats more into international schedules, such moaning and whining are inevitable.
At the same time, administrators across the cricketing world know they can’t undermine or ignore the growing influence of the IPL. That, however, doesn’t mean the BCCI can remain immune to their insecurities and concerns.
Obviously, there’s no role for the ICC, at least directly, as no official exception can be made for the IPL, given the profusion of franchise T20 leagues across the world. But the BCCI and other Boards can come to an understanding to ensure the seamless conduct of IPL and international cricket, an arrangement that can benefit everyone. In case anyone is still under any illusion, the IPL is only going to get bigger. Deal with it!
Watch the latest DH Videos here:
Deccan Herald is on WhatsApp Channels| Join now for Breaking News & Editor's Picks