.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Sight Screen

Tuesday, October 04, 2005

A question of contracts

It was way back in January 2001 that, in course of casual conversations, senior players Anil Kumble, Rahul Dravid and Javagal Srinath mentioned that the players were interested in seeing a contract system introduced in Indian cricket. Much of what Faisal Shariff and I wrote on Rediff from that day on was informed by inputs from the players -- those three, and on occasion Sachin Tendulkar and Saurav Ganguly -- themselves.
Four years later, seemingly, the situation remains unresolved; the BCCI has appointed yet another committee to revamp the system. Makes you think -- if we were in the dark ages, if the wheel hadn't been invented yet, and if it was up to the BCCI, we would still be locomoting on our two hind legs; I mean, just how difficult is it, really, to draw up a contract for an employee? Professional -- and professionally run -- organizations do it every day of the week.
Do we need contracts? Yes indeed: from the players point of view, to ensure that they are not cast adrift at the first hint of injury, as has happened in the past to the likes of Srinath and Kumble (their experiences, in fact, was what got the senior players thinking about this in the first place); from the BCCI's point of view, to ensure that acts of indiscipline can be punished, as they should be; and to hold players accountable for the standards of their play.
PS: Off to work, be back anon.

3 Comments:

  • Prem...as far as I understood..the players are already contracted???...this new exercise is to 'revise' the next year contracts...no??...to include new terms and conditions(for example the scope of their interaction with media etc etc). Well..lets see how long this committee takes...and what results it comes out with....but right now, I dont see any particular reasons to complain?

    By Blogger worma, at 11:32  

  • They are, but if you notice, the contracts are still iffy; players -- seniors, that is -- themselves are none too happy with the structure. So what you have is a stop gap arrangement, really. Which is the problem here -- surely you needed to have gotten the thing right the first time round, since you took 4 years over it in the first place? And surely, if you did in fact have proper contracts in place, a lot of what went wrong recently could have been contained?

    Need to get a lot of work done, pal, plus doesn't seem to be much that is hot, on the India sites. Talk to you later

    By Blogger Prem Panicker, at 11:39  

  • sure...if the original contracts were iffy...they are to blame for wrong formulation....just wanted to say that *this* committee might actually have the right intentions of correcting some of the earlier errors...

    ...anyways...catch you later..

    By Blogger worma, at 11:55  

Post a Comment

<< Home