In a decisive move that has raised eyebrows within the cricket community, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has opted not to name Shreyas Iyer and Ishan Kishan in its annual player retainership for the 2023-24 season. A notable absenteeism from the domestic cricket circuit, particularly the ongoing Ranji Trophy, appears to be the catalyst behind this unexpected decision. Despite being sidelined from international duties with the national team at the time, both players failed to participate in these first-class matches, thus contravening the board’s directives.
The BCCI, maintaining its stance on the importance of domestic cricket, stated, “Please note that Shreyas Iyer and Ishan Kishan were not considered for the annual contracts in this round of recommendations.” By emphasizing the precedence of domestic cricket participation, the board has underscored a non-negotiable policy for athletes during periods when they are not engaged in national representation. This deputy from entrenched norms sends a clear signal that the board is serious about ensuring due diligence to domestic commitments.
Jay Shah, the BCCI secretary, had previously issued warnings to centrally contracted players, urging them to play for their state teams in the Ranji Trophy. Despite this, neither Iyer nor Kishan complied initially, until Iyer’s eventual inclusion in Mumbai’s squad for the semi-final. Unavailability pervaded Iyer’s narrative, who, despite not being in the Indian team for the final three Tests against England, also did not play in the final group game for Mumbai nor the quarterfinal of the Ranji Trophy. Claiming to suffer from back issues, Iyer’s absence was thrown into question by the NCA’s head of sports science and medicine, who reportedly found no new injuries.
Kishan, on the other hand, withdrew ahead of the Test series against South Africa but resumed play in the DY Patil T20 Cup. However, his presence was not noted in Jharkhand’s lineup in the Ranji Trophy, thus contributing to his omission from the central contracts.
The repercussions of these decisions are substantial. As indicated by reports in the Indian Express, without a central contract, players like Iyer and Kishan are set to forfeit numerous benefits and privileges. Ordinarily, the central contract guarantees cricketers a designated fixed retainership amount in addition to match fees, allocated across four grades: A+, A, B, and C. Without such an affiliation, players will only secure match fees, lacking the financial security that the fixed retainership provides.
Moreover, access to the revered National Cricket Academy, a premier facility for player development and injury rehabilitation, is on the line. While centrally contracted players are entitled to use the academy as needed, others require explicit approval from their state associations, resulting in an additional bureaucratic layer for uncontracted players to navigate. Not to be overlooked, the contractual safety net also extends to insurance coverage, yet another privilege now inaccessible to Iyer and Kishan.
The current scenario sets a precedent for the future. It reflects BCCI’s intent to uphold the integrity of domestic cricket and its vital role in nurturing cricketing talent. Prospective and current players are being sent a message that value is placed on consistent participation in domestic leagues, a foundational aspect of India’s cricket structure.
The axing of Iyer and Kishan from the BCCI central contracts is not merely a punitive measure; it is a reaffirmation of the governing body’s prioritization of domestic cricket vitality. It’s an assertion that representation at the national level should not eclipse the obligations players have toward homegrown competitions. Amidst the chaos and clamor of international cricket, the BCCI’s statement underscores a broader ambition to balance the glamour of international exposure with the nurturing of domestic cricket’s ecosystem, ensuring the sport’s robustness and the readiness of its players at all levels.
