<p>Last week when the news about the BCCI – the richest cricket body and one of the wealthiest national federations in the world – still not having compensated the domestic players for the truncated 2020-21 season hit headlines, former India player Rohan Gavaskar made an interesting statement on Twitter.</p>.<p>“All state associations should have annual contracts with their players like the bcci does with the Indian team. A,B,C categories. If state contracts are not there then it’s impossible to make payments to domestic players in such a situation,” he tweeted.</p>.<p>Unlike his celebrated father Sunil Gavaskar who is seen only during India games and the IPL, Rohan, following a modest career, is the voice calling several domestic games. He’s seen first hand the numerous struggles domestic players go through in the ultra-competitive and physically taxing first-class circuit.</p>.<p>Rohan’s tweet was worth consideration. Most state associations get about Rs 20-25 crore annually from the BCCI to meet their expenses. The staging associations – ones which host international and IPL matches regularly – tend to get a little more for the extra expenses involved. So, allocating a percentage of it towards central contracts doesn’t seem like a big ask, does it?</p>.<p>“It definitely can be done but it’s not very easy,” reckoned Santosh Menon, secretary of the Karnataka State Cricket Association. “Yes, states get money from the BCCI but active associations like KSCA have a lot expenditures. We have a very strong calendar and have well-functioning centres in various districts. We have ensured cricket is not just limited to Bengaluru.</p>.<p>“So we spend much of that money in maintaining our facilities and improving cricket all-around. The proof is in the pudding. So much work has gone into Chinnaswamy and other centres. Unlike BCCI, state associations don’t have major revenue generation methods. We are totally dependent on the BCCI for our income. We have to budget with what we get. So it’s better for the BCCI itself to form a contract system state-wise for domestic players and pay them. What if we start the contract system and then stop it due to lack of funds.”</p>.<p>Menon felt a start could be made by paying respective state probables a fixed sum every season. “In states like Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Mumbai that produce an enormous amount of players, it won’t be tough to have 3 or 4 grades. But there are states that struggle to produce players. Some states get guest players because of talent shortage.</p>.<p>“Before a Ranji Trophy or a Vijay Hazare, states should be asked to name 25 or 30 probables. These probables should be guaranteed a fixed sum irrespective of whether they play or don’t. Ones who play anyways get match fees. There will be some criticism when we pick probables but no team selection is without controversies. This way there is some guarantee for players. Right now, talented kids who don’t get enough game time end up switching careers.”</p>.<p>Another senior administrator, speaking on condition of anonymity, felt it’s high time the BCCI puts more emphasis on the welfare of domestic players. “Yes, players earn more money playing domestic cricket now. But like how coronavirus wrecked the calendar last season and hit the players financially, there could be another catastrophe in the future.</p>.<p>“Coronavirus is still around and there are talks of a third wave. A set number of players who would end up playing for a state should be eligible for a guaranteed income. Many of the domestic players don’t have fat IPL contracts. They are dependent on first-class cricket for survival. They can’t be left in the lurch.”</p>
<p>Last week when the news about the BCCI – the richest cricket body and one of the wealthiest national federations in the world – still not having compensated the domestic players for the truncated 2020-21 season hit headlines, former India player Rohan Gavaskar made an interesting statement on Twitter.</p>.<p>“All state associations should have annual contracts with their players like the bcci does with the Indian team. A,B,C categories. If state contracts are not there then it’s impossible to make payments to domestic players in such a situation,” he tweeted.</p>.<p>Unlike his celebrated father Sunil Gavaskar who is seen only during India games and the IPL, Rohan, following a modest career, is the voice calling several domestic games. He’s seen first hand the numerous struggles domestic players go through in the ultra-competitive and physically taxing first-class circuit.</p>.<p>Rohan’s tweet was worth consideration. Most state associations get about Rs 20-25 crore annually from the BCCI to meet their expenses. The staging associations – ones which host international and IPL matches regularly – tend to get a little more for the extra expenses involved. So, allocating a percentage of it towards central contracts doesn’t seem like a big ask, does it?</p>.<p>“It definitely can be done but it’s not very easy,” reckoned Santosh Menon, secretary of the Karnataka State Cricket Association. “Yes, states get money from the BCCI but active associations like KSCA have a lot expenditures. We have a very strong calendar and have well-functioning centres in various districts. We have ensured cricket is not just limited to Bengaluru.</p>.<p>“So we spend much of that money in maintaining our facilities and improving cricket all-around. The proof is in the pudding. So much work has gone into Chinnaswamy and other centres. Unlike BCCI, state associations don’t have major revenue generation methods. We are totally dependent on the BCCI for our income. We have to budget with what we get. So it’s better for the BCCI itself to form a contract system state-wise for domestic players and pay them. What if we start the contract system and then stop it due to lack of funds.”</p>.<p>Menon felt a start could be made by paying respective state probables a fixed sum every season. “In states like Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Mumbai that produce an enormous amount of players, it won’t be tough to have 3 or 4 grades. But there are states that struggle to produce players. Some states get guest players because of talent shortage.</p>.<p>“Before a Ranji Trophy or a Vijay Hazare, states should be asked to name 25 or 30 probables. These probables should be guaranteed a fixed sum irrespective of whether they play or don’t. Ones who play anyways get match fees. There will be some criticism when we pick probables but no team selection is without controversies. This way there is some guarantee for players. Right now, talented kids who don’t get enough game time end up switching careers.”</p>.<p>Another senior administrator, speaking on condition of anonymity, felt it’s high time the BCCI puts more emphasis on the welfare of domestic players. “Yes, players earn more money playing domestic cricket now. But like how coronavirus wrecked the calendar last season and hit the players financially, there could be another catastrophe in the future.</p>.<p>“Coronavirus is still around and there are talks of a third wave. A set number of players who would end up playing for a state should be eligible for a guaranteed income. Many of the domestic players don’t have fat IPL contracts. They are dependent on first-class cricket for survival. They can’t be left in the lurch.”</p>
