WICB and WIPA combine to help West Indies set unwanted record
Directly as a result of the farcical
WIPA v WICB impasse, West Indies provided Bangladesh its
2nd ever test win a couple of days ago.
Players are totally entitled to receive contracts, but in the absence of these contracts, is industrial action in a sporting scenario the right option? It is not as though the West Indies players were blameless. They didn't have contracts because they refused to sign the contracts that the WICB offered. Did the WICB offer favourable terms? Perhaps not. As it is, West Indies cricket has suffered majorly in the past couple of years with sponsors pulling out.
Would Digicel, the current sponsor, have had the right to demand that the WICB field a XI that would enhance the Digicel brand? Wouldn't Digicel's contract with the WICB have referred to WICB attempting to/ensure that the best players turned out for the West Indies? It's quite obvious that Digicel wouldn't like to have been associated with a side led by Floyd Reifer, who got a birthday present in the form of the captaincy a couple of weeks before his 37th birthday. It's like England naming Ian Ward or Aftab Habib captain and India naming Vijay Bharadwaj skipper. Of course, one thing is for sure - captaincy has a positive impact on Reifer's batting. His batting average went up by a whopping 36% (7.87 to 10.7).
The reality is that regardless of the result of the game, no side would have "won" or proved anything. Had West Indies' B side beaten Bangladesh, it would have told us that Bangladesh aren't even good enough to beat a second string WI XI. Now that Bangladesh have won, as a corollary, it implies that West Indies cricket is so much lacking in depth that a 2nd XI loses to Bangladesh. I suspect with the exception of perhaps New Zealand, every other country's 2nd XI should be able to beat Bangladesh.
As a result of the feud between the cricket board and the players, the test had 9 debutants (7 for West Indies, 2 for Bangladesh) and
this is the first time since 1961 that 9 or more players have debuted in a test that wasn't the first test played by a country (or the first one played after a prolonged break).
Bangladesh v India in 2000 had 14 debuts, Zimbabwe v India in 1992 had 10 debuts (all the Zimbabwe players except Traicos), West Indies v South Africa in 1992 had 13 debuts (South Africa's first test after re-admission) and Sri Lanka v England in 1982 had 12 debuts. Most of the other games that had a lot of debuts were those played shortly after World War II.
Labels: bangladesh, contracts, debut, industrial action, statistic, strike, west indies, wicb, wipa
Cricket Australia announces contracted players list
After
reaching an agreement with the players, Cricket Australia announced the
list of players who have been awarded contracts for the next 12 months. Prominent among those who have not been offered a contract are
Darren Lehmann, Ian Harvey and
Matthew Elliott. The new faces are
Daniel Cullen and Michael Lewis.
It does seem very obvious that
the selectors had the 2007 World Cup in mind while deciding the contracts list. There're quite a few players aged under 25 in that list. But the inclusion of 30 year old Michael Lewis is beyond my understanding. He'd be 32-33 in a couple of years' time when McGrath and Kasprowicz leave the scene. Shaun Tait would be the natural permanent inclusion in the fast bowling roster when that happens. I dont really see a career for Lewis, given that he is not a spring chicken.
Labels: contracts
Pay negotiations breakdown in Australia between the board and the players' association
Following Cricket Australia's
acceptance of the terms proposed by the Australian Cricketers Association, it was widely felt that the issue over whether to go in for a flat-fee structure or a percentage sharing was resolved. However that doesnt seem to be the case now, with
the ACA announcing that the cricket board had rejected its proposals in spite of the apparent progress made earlier.
The deadline for resolving the issue is June 30 and this could end up
impacting contracts for the next year. There're
quite a
few people around who would be
elated at the chaos in the Aussie camp.
Labels: contracts
Viv Richards has
asked the players and officials involved in the dispute over
the new contracts to end the confrontation in the interest of cricket.
Labels: contracts
India's contracts system, long delayed,
has finally been signed before the cricketers leave for the Bangladesh tour. The
proposed system had been stalled
due to issues of match fees v/s retainer fees being viewed differently by senior and junior players.
Labels: contracts
West Indies cricket keeps finding new ways of getting into crisis situations. Just when we thought that after
their win in the ICC Champions Trophy, they were looking like turning a corner, it now seems like
several of their top players will not be playing in the VB Series in Australia since they have not signed their contracts with WICB due to conflicting board and player sponsors/endorsements.
Labels: contracts
At long last, the contract system has been
finalised by the BCCI and so a Tendulkar or a Ganguly would get more monies than a fresh entrant into the team.
Labels: contracts
The graded system of contracts for India's international cricketers has
at last been agreed upon.
Labels: contracts
John Wright's contract as coach of the Indian team
has been extended by a year while Andrew Leipus and Gregory King had their contracts renewed until the end of the 2007 World Cup.
Labels: contracts
The proposed central contracts system for India's international cricketers
has been stalled again, this time because of differences amongst the players on some specifics.
Labels: contracts