G Rajaraman
If they set about the difficult but satisfying task of hearing the unheard, the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s decision-makers may get to hear the murmurs of discontent just as they may hear whoops of joy or sighs of relief in the wake of the terse media release on Sunday listing men cricketers who are on the graded central contract.
There may be no need for a Chairman of Selection Committee to be around when such decisions are made. And yes, there may be no room for emotions in such decision-making processes. But logic – and a basic explanation for some decisions – is always paramount when decisions assessing the utility of cricketers to the Indian team are made.
For, the contract system is a form a value judgement on a player’s utility to the national team in the year ahead. And the BCCI – especially its selection committee and the team thinktank – must stop being seen as being insensitive to the needs of psychological safety for the players it has contracted.
Surely, there is no perceptible rationale to the decision to retain off-spinner R Ashwin and Mohammed Shami as Grade A cricketers and Mohammed Siraj as a Grade B player even as injured paceman Jasprit Bumrah has been retained in Grade A+ and Rishabh Pant, now in rehab after a nasty car accident on New Year’s eve, has kept a berth among those with Grade A contracts.
Make no mistake. Jasprit Bumrah is fabulous cricketer. Yet, at a time when he is in rehab and uncertain of when he would return to cricket, the decision to retain him in A+ will have a domino effect. Even if Ashwin and Mohammed Shami, the bulwarks of the Indian bowling, may not mind it, the decision to rank them below Jasprit Bumrah will have to comes under scrutiny.
Is the decision-making process guided by the question if it matters to the players how they are graded? Of course, it will matter to anyone who is part of the system, even if they do not talk about it. It is not about the couple of crore rupees less that may hurt the players but the perceived utility by those assessing their performances, fitness and potential as they continue serve the team.
Ashwin has claimed 45 wickets in 10 Tests and Shami 22 wickets in 8 Tests since the dawn of 2022. In Jasprit Bumrah’s absence, the latter has found himself in the one-day international mix well. Under such circumstances, the signals sent out to the two senior bowlers is not really the best. They are being tacitly told that they are valued less than an injured fast bowler.
Perhaps, it is time for the BCCI to create a separate category for players it wants to retain on contract despite their availability being under question on account of injury and the rehabilitation that follows. To retain injured cricketers in grades higher than those who are sweating it out on the field may not send the best signals to these players.
Consider this as well: If on the one hand, BCCI and its thinktank, comprising the selectors, team captain/s and chief coach, come across as sensitive in retaining the injured Bumrah and Rishabh Pant on contract, they do fall short on that count in the case of some other players, not the least being Ashwin, Shami and Hanuma Vihari.
Of course, nobody can be on the list of contracted players forever. And there comes a time in the careers of all players when they can no longer count on the central contract as a source of assured annual income. Yet, sometimes the choice of the selectors indicates their line of thinking – as is the case with Hanuma Vihari. And the way it is delivered reeks of insensitivity.
Similar has been the case of Umran Malik. With 24 wickets in 16 matches in India’s Blue outfit, including as recently as on February 1 this year, he will not be wrong if he feels disappointed at the slight handed out by those deciding on contracts. The least that should be expected of the BCCI is an explanation of the decision.
Surely, the BCCI must be different to owners of league team who run their squads with one eye on performances and another on the bottom-line. It is not wrong to expect a greater sensitivity from the Board when it comes to dealing with players and their contracts. While embracing professionalism, it can set a great example by being more empathic to the cricketers.
The decision-makers in BCCI may not have heard of third Century royal who spent a year in the forest, listening to the myriad sounds of the cuckoos, the leaves, the crickets and the wind. Sent back by his spiritual master, the humbled prince discovered he could hear the flowers opening, the sun warming the earth and the grass drinking the morning dew.
Indeed, it is critical to hear the unheard.