temujin
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2010
- Messages
- 447
- Reaction score
- 0
This has been point of much debate since the row over Malinga and Gayle erupted.I suppose Malinga has some justification for opting out of the test series but with Gayle, he clearly sees his future within IPL rather than the Windies national side. Also, I notice that a lot of senior Indian players, including Dhoni and Gambhir, have chosen to opt out of national duties in the period immediately following the IPL. One could argue that this would help test the bench strength and give younger players the opportunity to break into the Indian side but this apparent laissez faire attitude to playing for one's country can only prove detrimental to Indian cricket in the longer term.
In recent days, Sanjay Manjrekar, who admittedly has a vested interest in the success of IPL, has come out strongly in favour of the ICC creating a window for the IPL in the FTP
Sanjay Manjrekar: Thank god for the IPL | Opinion | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo
Thank god for the IPL
It's a retirement plan for players who struggle to make a living after their careers end
I believe the IPL should be given a special window in the ICC cricket calendar for just one reason and one reason only: because the players benefit from it greatly.
Some of us today, who in some capacity or the other are connected with the game and are making a living from it, should be grateful to the players who are performing in the sun. "Just imagine if tomorrow, for some reason, the players stopped playing. We will all be out of jobs," a fellow commentator said. It is a remark I will never forget.
It is actually the simple reality of our professions. And it is a reality that we in media, sports management or administration should never forget. By allowing current players to play in the IPL, without having to choose between country and club, the administrators have a great chance to show the players gratitude, which is something they don't get enough of.
A cricketer spends the prime of his life, starting from about age 10, on the cricket field, training to become a top-class player. When he finally becomes one of the rare few to make it to the top, he discovers he has only a short time there to make the most of his acquired skills. Other performing artists are more fortunate than cricketers in this regard, and yes, I don't have to say this, you know it well: a 21-year cricket career is possible only for the chosen ones.
Of course, cricketers who can build around their core cricket skills are able to carve out careers in media, coaching and other related occupations, and thus sustain themselves after their cricket careers are over.
But there are many who are incapable of developing other skills, and feel completely lost in the world outside cricket. It's a horrible feeling when the cricketer starts to realise that the skills he acquired with great effort over the years, the skills he was so proud of and which people paid good money to watch, are slowly beginning to desert him with age. And then that day comes when it dawns on him that the world has no use for him anymore. I guess that is a fact of life that hits everyone at some point of their lives, but cricketers are less prepared for it than most.
For a man who has largely lived an uncommon life, it's not easy to merge into the common world. This situation is frightening, to say the least, and there are numerous cricketers who are trying to make a go of it. I meet such players quite often, and it distresses me to see that many are not doing a great job. The IPL is a boon for such cricketers, who find life after cricket tough. It is one way of making sure we have fewer players like this in future.
I know international cricket makes money for players, but it does not even come close to matching what one IPL season can put in their pockets. Maybe we need to find out why international cricket, the highest level of our sport, is not making the most money for players.
Take the example of Lasith Malinga. He didn't have the fitness to be a regular member of the Sri Lanka Test side - from which he has just announced his retirement - and he perhaps doesn't know how long his international career will last. It's difficult to see him making a career in the media. So should he be grudged if he wants to secure his future with a few IPL seasons? Taking this argument forward, should he be placed in a position where he has to choose between his own future and playing for his country?
Increasingly players from countries like Sri Lanka, West Indies and New Zealand will face such questions, and it is unfair on them as individuals.
The other advantage of the IPL is that you don't have to be a truly extraordinary player to make the big bucks. If you have decent Twenty20 skills, and the franchisee feels you are well-behaved and not going to give them too much trouble, your life is made.
I wonder if you have noticed a dramatic change on the Indian cricket stage recently. At the World Cup final, for instance, apart from the hundreds of screaming fans in the stands, who were the people the cameras constantly panned to? They were mostly politicians, Bollywood celebrities, rich businessmen and cricket officials. The couple or so cricketers you may have seen during the coverage were former players who are now involved in administration and thus were able to get prime seats.
Where were the other former India players? Mumbai is home to more cricketers who played for India than any other city, and surely these players would have liked to see their team play in the final of a World Cup. So where were the Wadekars and the Nadkarnis? Either they did not turn up or were not given the VIP seats that TV cameras generally find famous people in. I have learnt that these past stalwarts increasingly find themselves out of place in this new world of Indian cricket.
Whether we like it or not, we have come to accept that fame, power and money open most doors in the world. The IPLs may, if not anything else, ensure that the average retired cricketer has at least the last of those three attributes to find a VIP seat at a World Cup final.
The IPL has its flaws, but no other cricket event in history has created so much wealth for such a large number of players. As a former India cricketer I am glad it is making so many domestic players financially secure. It's up to the other cricket boards in the world, particularly those who can't hope to generate such revenues themselves, to help their players share in the IPL's riches.
© ESPN EMEA Ltd
Dileep Premachandran's article below from Cricinfo explores the dilemma facing players in the IPL further..
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/512783.html
Why blame players for choosing club over country?
The issue of loyalty is not as straightforward in cricket as in football and American sport. Ultimately it's about the players getting just reward for their talent
Club or country? Chicken or egg? Which comes first? It's a question that has been at the forefront of cricket aficionados' thoughts over the past fortnight after the hullaballoo involving Sri Lankan players in the IPL, and Chris Gayle.
Because it's such an emotive subject, the shades of grey are seldom seen. Depending on where you stand, someone like Lasith Malinga is either an opportunistic mercenary or a young man messed about with by administrators while trying to do his best for himself and his family. The IPL is either the source of all evil or the best thing since bread came sliced.
Those who decry it ignore how it has finally given top-level cricketers some degree of control over their own destiny. Its apologists overlook the effect it has had on the cricket economy, leaving less prosperous national associations on the verge of financial ruin if they don't toe the Indian board's line.
Cricket is pretty unique in that it's one sport where national recognition opens doors to financial riches. You don't need to represent the United States to land a multi-million dollar NBA or NFL deal. Lebron James was on the cover of Sports Illustrated long before he donned the Cleveland Cavaliers' vest, and his very first contract dwarfed anything that Sachin Tendulkar or MS Dhoni have signed. His shoe deal with Nike alone was worth $90 million.
In cricket, though, until the IPL came along, you were nothing without a national cap. It's possible for those playing first-class cricket in England and Australia to make a comfortable living, and the same is the case now in India with increased payments for those on the domestic circuit. But if you're an ordinary first-class pro in New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Pakistan or West Indies, chances are you won't be swanning around in a Ferrari.
Even those with a national contract are unlikely to. Consider this. A year after he took four wickets in four balls at the 2007 World Cup, Malinga was denied a national contract. He had broken down months earlier and been forced to miss tours and the inaugural IPL season. Sri Lanka Cricket's decision was as unkind as cuts go.
It wasn't as though they were short of funds. Soon after the 2008 Asia Cup win, officials helped themselves to significant pay hikes. The players had to make do with the $100,000 that they had been paid the previous year. The only sop was $25,000 paid as bonus to Kumar Sangakkara, Muttiah Muralitharan and Mahela Jayawardene for "outstanding performances". Interestingly Sanath Jayasuriya, whose century helped win the Asia Cup final, wasn't deemed outstanding enough.
A few months later Malinga was given a contract, a grade II one worth $60,000. In contrast, his first two seasons with the Mumbai Indians, who didn't give up on him despite injury concerns, netted him $700,000. When the franchise retained him before the player auction last January, they will have guaranteed him at least $500,000 a season.
The league is India's baby, backed by the biggest sponsors in the game, and any national board that takes it on is doomed to failure. Far better, instead, to listen to what your players want, and bank that 10%
"Because of the IPL, I got a chance to come back to the national team," said Malinga on Tuesday. "After the injury, nobody looked after me and I was not offered a contract. But thanks to the IPL I didn't lose anything but I improved my cricket a lot. I'm saddened the way I was treated, but not disappointed."
Money can't buy loyalty, but it does give players the security to go out and perform with minds free of worry. Contrast the attitude to Malinga with how AC Milan, Europe's second-most successful football club, treated Fernando Redondo, the talented Argentine playmaker who moved there in 2000.
Redondo played just 16 times in four seasons after injuring his knee while on the treadmill. The club kept paying him £2.74 million a year until he asked for it to be suspended. They also refused to take back the house and car that they had given him.
With state sides and counties largely depending on national boards to stay financially solvent, it's cricket's national associations that have performed the role that football clubs do. It was Sri Lanka Cricket that discovered Malinga and invested both time and money to ensure he could be a factor at the highest level. It's the national academies that tend to do for cricket what La Masia has done for Barcelona football.
In that regard, you can understand why cricket boards are angered when a player chooses the IPL over representing his country. After all, where he is today is as much a result of their work as it is a consequence of his talent. But under the present dispensation, the national boards get decent compensation, with 10% of all IPL contracts signed going into their coffers. Just for signing no-objection certificates, Sri Lanka Cricket's account is richer by nearly half a million dollars.
Is that enough? Probably not. What cricket is going through right now is a churning similar to that which football underwent in the 1950s, when the likes of Alfredo di Stefano and Omar Sivori abandoned their South American roots to make a better living in Europe's cash-rich leagues. That talent drain continues to this day. Europe's top clubs have the money and they provide a stage, the European Champions League, that's second only to the World Cup in terms of prestige. Only someone lacking ambition would pass up a chance to play there.
With the IPL, things are not so clear cut. Football, regardless of whether it's for your national team or your club, is played over 90 minutes. It could even be argued that the best club sides, with their agglomeration of talent and the chance to practise and play together 10 months a year, are superior to any national team. That certainly isn't the case with Twenty20 cricket and the IPL.
Given how the vast majority of players want to be part of the IPL, creating a window for it within the framework of the Future Tours Programme is the only way forward. The league is India's baby, backed by the biggest sponsors in the game, and any national board that takes it on is doomed to failure. Far better instead to listen to what your players want, and bank that 10%.
Talk to the likes of Sangakkara and Daniel Vettori and they will tell you that this isn't about club or country. It's about players finally being able to take home money commensurate with their ability. When you can make as much from six weeks of IPL as you would from a few years of playing for the national side, why would you not throw your cap into the ring? And if your team owners look after you better than your board does, why would you not be loyal to them? Why should Gayle not, like you and me, honour those who honour him and disdain those who despise him, to quote the Bible?
There will always be a group of people who insist that "muddied oafs and flannelled fools" are paid too much. But unlike many administrators, bankers or politicians who rob us blind, most sportsmen leave something tangible behind. Michael Jordan, who helped take athletes' salaries into the stratosphere, once said: "Obstacles don't have to stop you. If you run into a wall, don't turn around and give up. Figure out how to climb it, go through it, or work around it." Malinga, for one, has done that, and instead of grudging him the rewards, we should be happy for a man who'll probably need a walking stick to get around by the time he's 50.
© ESPN EMEA Ltd.
Any thoughts??
In recent days, Sanjay Manjrekar, who admittedly has a vested interest in the success of IPL, has come out strongly in favour of the ICC creating a window for the IPL in the FTP
Sanjay Manjrekar: Thank god for the IPL | Opinion | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo
Thank god for the IPL
It's a retirement plan for players who struggle to make a living after their careers end
I believe the IPL should be given a special window in the ICC cricket calendar for just one reason and one reason only: because the players benefit from it greatly.
Some of us today, who in some capacity or the other are connected with the game and are making a living from it, should be grateful to the players who are performing in the sun. "Just imagine if tomorrow, for some reason, the players stopped playing. We will all be out of jobs," a fellow commentator said. It is a remark I will never forget.
It is actually the simple reality of our professions. And it is a reality that we in media, sports management or administration should never forget. By allowing current players to play in the IPL, without having to choose between country and club, the administrators have a great chance to show the players gratitude, which is something they don't get enough of.
A cricketer spends the prime of his life, starting from about age 10, on the cricket field, training to become a top-class player. When he finally becomes one of the rare few to make it to the top, he discovers he has only a short time there to make the most of his acquired skills. Other performing artists are more fortunate than cricketers in this regard, and yes, I don't have to say this, you know it well: a 21-year cricket career is possible only for the chosen ones.
Of course, cricketers who can build around their core cricket skills are able to carve out careers in media, coaching and other related occupations, and thus sustain themselves after their cricket careers are over.
But there are many who are incapable of developing other skills, and feel completely lost in the world outside cricket. It's a horrible feeling when the cricketer starts to realise that the skills he acquired with great effort over the years, the skills he was so proud of and which people paid good money to watch, are slowly beginning to desert him with age. And then that day comes when it dawns on him that the world has no use for him anymore. I guess that is a fact of life that hits everyone at some point of their lives, but cricketers are less prepared for it than most.
For a man who has largely lived an uncommon life, it's not easy to merge into the common world. This situation is frightening, to say the least, and there are numerous cricketers who are trying to make a go of it. I meet such players quite often, and it distresses me to see that many are not doing a great job. The IPL is a boon for such cricketers, who find life after cricket tough. It is one way of making sure we have fewer players like this in future.
I know international cricket makes money for players, but it does not even come close to matching what one IPL season can put in their pockets. Maybe we need to find out why international cricket, the highest level of our sport, is not making the most money for players.
Take the example of Lasith Malinga. He didn't have the fitness to be a regular member of the Sri Lanka Test side - from which he has just announced his retirement - and he perhaps doesn't know how long his international career will last. It's difficult to see him making a career in the media. So should he be grudged if he wants to secure his future with a few IPL seasons? Taking this argument forward, should he be placed in a position where he has to choose between his own future and playing for his country?
Increasingly players from countries like Sri Lanka, West Indies and New Zealand will face such questions, and it is unfair on them as individuals.
The other advantage of the IPL is that you don't have to be a truly extraordinary player to make the big bucks. If you have decent Twenty20 skills, and the franchisee feels you are well-behaved and not going to give them too much trouble, your life is made.
I wonder if you have noticed a dramatic change on the Indian cricket stage recently. At the World Cup final, for instance, apart from the hundreds of screaming fans in the stands, who were the people the cameras constantly panned to? They were mostly politicians, Bollywood celebrities, rich businessmen and cricket officials. The couple or so cricketers you may have seen during the coverage were former players who are now involved in administration and thus were able to get prime seats.
Where were the other former India players? Mumbai is home to more cricketers who played for India than any other city, and surely these players would have liked to see their team play in the final of a World Cup. So where were the Wadekars and the Nadkarnis? Either they did not turn up or were not given the VIP seats that TV cameras generally find famous people in. I have learnt that these past stalwarts increasingly find themselves out of place in this new world of Indian cricket.
Whether we like it or not, we have come to accept that fame, power and money open most doors in the world. The IPLs may, if not anything else, ensure that the average retired cricketer has at least the last of those three attributes to find a VIP seat at a World Cup final.
The IPL has its flaws, but no other cricket event in history has created so much wealth for such a large number of players. As a former India cricketer I am glad it is making so many domestic players financially secure. It's up to the other cricket boards in the world, particularly those who can't hope to generate such revenues themselves, to help their players share in the IPL's riches.
© ESPN EMEA Ltd
Dileep Premachandran's article below from Cricinfo explores the dilemma facing players in the IPL further..
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/512783.html
Why blame players for choosing club over country?
The issue of loyalty is not as straightforward in cricket as in football and American sport. Ultimately it's about the players getting just reward for their talent
Club or country? Chicken or egg? Which comes first? It's a question that has been at the forefront of cricket aficionados' thoughts over the past fortnight after the hullaballoo involving Sri Lankan players in the IPL, and Chris Gayle.
Because it's such an emotive subject, the shades of grey are seldom seen. Depending on where you stand, someone like Lasith Malinga is either an opportunistic mercenary or a young man messed about with by administrators while trying to do his best for himself and his family. The IPL is either the source of all evil or the best thing since bread came sliced.
Those who decry it ignore how it has finally given top-level cricketers some degree of control over their own destiny. Its apologists overlook the effect it has had on the cricket economy, leaving less prosperous national associations on the verge of financial ruin if they don't toe the Indian board's line.
Cricket is pretty unique in that it's one sport where national recognition opens doors to financial riches. You don't need to represent the United States to land a multi-million dollar NBA or NFL deal. Lebron James was on the cover of Sports Illustrated long before he donned the Cleveland Cavaliers' vest, and his very first contract dwarfed anything that Sachin Tendulkar or MS Dhoni have signed. His shoe deal with Nike alone was worth $90 million.
In cricket, though, until the IPL came along, you were nothing without a national cap. It's possible for those playing first-class cricket in England and Australia to make a comfortable living, and the same is the case now in India with increased payments for those on the domestic circuit. But if you're an ordinary first-class pro in New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Pakistan or West Indies, chances are you won't be swanning around in a Ferrari.
Even those with a national contract are unlikely to. Consider this. A year after he took four wickets in four balls at the 2007 World Cup, Malinga was denied a national contract. He had broken down months earlier and been forced to miss tours and the inaugural IPL season. Sri Lanka Cricket's decision was as unkind as cuts go.
It wasn't as though they were short of funds. Soon after the 2008 Asia Cup win, officials helped themselves to significant pay hikes. The players had to make do with the $100,000 that they had been paid the previous year. The only sop was $25,000 paid as bonus to Kumar Sangakkara, Muttiah Muralitharan and Mahela Jayawardene for "outstanding performances". Interestingly Sanath Jayasuriya, whose century helped win the Asia Cup final, wasn't deemed outstanding enough.
A few months later Malinga was given a contract, a grade II one worth $60,000. In contrast, his first two seasons with the Mumbai Indians, who didn't give up on him despite injury concerns, netted him $700,000. When the franchise retained him before the player auction last January, they will have guaranteed him at least $500,000 a season.
The league is India's baby, backed by the biggest sponsors in the game, and any national board that takes it on is doomed to failure. Far better, instead, to listen to what your players want, and bank that 10%
"Because of the IPL, I got a chance to come back to the national team," said Malinga on Tuesday. "After the injury, nobody looked after me and I was not offered a contract. But thanks to the IPL I didn't lose anything but I improved my cricket a lot. I'm saddened the way I was treated, but not disappointed."
Money can't buy loyalty, but it does give players the security to go out and perform with minds free of worry. Contrast the attitude to Malinga with how AC Milan, Europe's second-most successful football club, treated Fernando Redondo, the talented Argentine playmaker who moved there in 2000.
Redondo played just 16 times in four seasons after injuring his knee while on the treadmill. The club kept paying him £2.74 million a year until he asked for it to be suspended. They also refused to take back the house and car that they had given him.
With state sides and counties largely depending on national boards to stay financially solvent, it's cricket's national associations that have performed the role that football clubs do. It was Sri Lanka Cricket that discovered Malinga and invested both time and money to ensure he could be a factor at the highest level. It's the national academies that tend to do for cricket what La Masia has done for Barcelona football.
In that regard, you can understand why cricket boards are angered when a player chooses the IPL over representing his country. After all, where he is today is as much a result of their work as it is a consequence of his talent. But under the present dispensation, the national boards get decent compensation, with 10% of all IPL contracts signed going into their coffers. Just for signing no-objection certificates, Sri Lanka Cricket's account is richer by nearly half a million dollars.
Is that enough? Probably not. What cricket is going through right now is a churning similar to that which football underwent in the 1950s, when the likes of Alfredo di Stefano and Omar Sivori abandoned their South American roots to make a better living in Europe's cash-rich leagues. That talent drain continues to this day. Europe's top clubs have the money and they provide a stage, the European Champions League, that's second only to the World Cup in terms of prestige. Only someone lacking ambition would pass up a chance to play there.
With the IPL, things are not so clear cut. Football, regardless of whether it's for your national team or your club, is played over 90 minutes. It could even be argued that the best club sides, with their agglomeration of talent and the chance to practise and play together 10 months a year, are superior to any national team. That certainly isn't the case with Twenty20 cricket and the IPL.
Given how the vast majority of players want to be part of the IPL, creating a window for it within the framework of the Future Tours Programme is the only way forward. The league is India's baby, backed by the biggest sponsors in the game, and any national board that takes it on is doomed to failure. Far better instead to listen to what your players want, and bank that 10%.
Talk to the likes of Sangakkara and Daniel Vettori and they will tell you that this isn't about club or country. It's about players finally being able to take home money commensurate with their ability. When you can make as much from six weeks of IPL as you would from a few years of playing for the national side, why would you not throw your cap into the ring? And if your team owners look after you better than your board does, why would you not be loyal to them? Why should Gayle not, like you and me, honour those who honour him and disdain those who despise him, to quote the Bible?
There will always be a group of people who insist that "muddied oafs and flannelled fools" are paid too much. But unlike many administrators, bankers or politicians who rob us blind, most sportsmen leave something tangible behind. Michael Jordan, who helped take athletes' salaries into the stratosphere, once said: "Obstacles don't have to stop you. If you run into a wall, don't turn around and give up. Figure out how to climb it, go through it, or work around it." Malinga, for one, has done that, and instead of grudging him the rewards, we should be happy for a man who'll probably need a walking stick to get around by the time he's 50.
© ESPN EMEA Ltd.
Any thoughts??
