Ahead of IPL 2024, Former India cricketer Praveen Kumar has ignited a fiery debate within the cricketing community by calling for equality in the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s (BCCI) player regulations.
The former India pacer’s outspoken remarks come in the wake of recent controversies surrounding player availability for domestic tournaments, particularly targeting the cases of Shreyas Iyer, Ishan Kishan, and Hardik Pandya.
BCCI Mandate For Players
In February, the BCCI unveiled its central contracts, stipulating that players not engaged in national duties must be accessible for their respective domestic teams. This criterion was purportedly aimed at ensuring a consistent level of participation and commitment from contracted players. However, the implementation of this directive has sparked contention and raised questions regarding its fairness and applicability.
Shreyas Iyer, Ishan Kishan lose annual central contract
Shreyas Iyer and Ishan Kishan found themselves excluded from the BCCI’s player retention list, purportedly due to their unavailability for domestic fixtures despite being away on international duties.
Iyer’s case garnered attention as he did feature for Mumbai in the Ranji Trophy semi-final and final matches, albeit after his exclusion from the contract list. Conversely, Kishan failed to make any appearances for Jharkhand in the same tournament, fueling speculation about his commitment to domestic cricket.
Praveen Kumar Questions BCCI Leniency For Hardik Pandya
Praveen Kumar’s criticism wasn’t solely directed at Iyer and Kishan; it also encompassed Hardik Pandya, the star all-rounder who retained his ‘A’ category central contract despite queries over his domestic cricket participation.
The pointed remarks from Kumar – who has played for Royal Challengers Bangalore, Mumbai Indians, and Punjab Kings in the IPL – questioned Pandya’s commitment and the purported leniency in his treatment, have added fuel to the ongoing discourse surrounding player responsibilities.
On Shubhankar Mishra’s YouTube channel, Kumar said, “Hardik Pandya chaand se thodi utar ke aaya hai? Khelna padega isko bhi. Kyun iske liye alag niyam hai? Isko bhi board ko dhamkana chahiye. (Has Hardik Pandya descended from the moon? He has to play too. Why are there different rules for him? The BCCI should threaten him).”
Pandya will be leading five-time champions Mumbai Indians in the upcoming IPL 2024 season. The Baroda cricketer was traded from Gujarat Titans ahead of the IPL 2024 Auction and was appointed the captain of the franchise.
Kumar’s argument underscores a broader sentiment within the cricketing fraternity regarding the equitable treatment of players regarding their obligations to domestic cricket. His assertion that all players should adhere to similar standards of availability for domestic tournaments, regardless of their international stature, raises pertinent questions about fairness and accountability within the system.
The case of Hardik Pandya, who recently made a comeback from injury and participated in the DY Patil T20 Cup ahead of the IPL 2024, exemplifies the complexities of balancing international commitments with domestic responsibilities.
“Why would you play just the domestic T20 tournament? Play all three formats. Or have you played 60-70 Test matches that you will just play T20? The country needs you. If you don’t want to play Test cricket, give it in writing,” said Kumar. “Maybe Pandya has been informed that he would not be picked for Tests. I don’t have any clear information,” the Meerut cricketer added.
Kumar’s call for Pandya to consider playing across all formats and his scepticism towards players selectively choosing tournaments echoes a sentiment shared by many cricket enthusiasts. The former Indian pacer’s remarks encapsulate a broader concern regarding the prioritisation of limited-overs cricket over the traditional longer formats, particularly Test cricket.
Puneet Sharma Mykhel
source: mykhel.com