| Series | Countries | Live Scores | Fixtures | Results | News |
Features
|
Photos | Blogs | Statistics | Archive | Video & Audio | Games | Mobile | |||||||||||||||||||||
« Low blows all around | The four kinds of leadership »
October 15, 2008Posted by Aakash Chopra on 10/15/2008 in County cricket
Does the county format benefit players?
 | ||
|
| ||
|
|
|
On both occasions the conversation drifted to the state of county cricket in England. Both were really unhappy with the way things were run in the country that gave birth to this sport. I argued that it's not the standard but the format that needs to be tinkered with. Probably they were playing too many games in a season and that causes the interest of spectators and players to wane so that towards the end of the tiring season they just go through the formality of turning up for matches while eagerly waiting for the season to finish. But my friends disagreed.
The ex-journalist said the standard was poor while the lawyer insisted a lot of players were clinging on to their places for monetary benefits. According to him most players get a three-year contract with the county and instead of trying hard every year, they take it easy for the first couple of years and then pull up their socks in the last year to get an extension and work towards the benefit year which is quite big in England. He added that this attitude towards the game infiltrates to the younger lot in the dressing room and they end up following their seniors. If that really is the case then this is a serious problem.
Instead of arguing further we got into a more informative chat. For starters I told him the value of having these senior guys around in the circuit. English cricket needs a few players like Mark Ramprakash to ensure that the standard of the game remains high. If young players dream of dismissing the Tendulkars one day then they must be good enough to breach Ramprakash's defence which, I must tell you, is not easy. Such players provide a reality check for these youngsters and give them a glimpse of the difficulties that lie ahead. Besides, having a senior in the squad provides the youngsters with a much-needed cushion that helps them grow as cricketers without putting too much pressure on them to perform every time they walk onto the field.
Even though my friend accepted my reason for having the seniors around, he insisted that the system is flawed. He said there are 18 counties and almost all of them have nearly 30 players in their books, which means that even for a second XI game, nearly 80% of the 22 players on the park are contracted with their respective counties. He couldn't see the point in having over 500 contracted players in the country when most of them do not have a realistic chance of ever playing for England.
Well, I couldn't quite get their system for we don't have contracts at the state level in India and there is no benefit year even at the end of an illustrious first-class career. The only way to cling on to our places in the side is to perform and perform consistently. Yes, the money has increased at the domestic level but one must do well and play the maximum number of matches to earn decently, which means first for one's state and then for one's zone and the opportunity to represent the zone is given only to those who've done well for their respective states. A few might argue that with the IPL the earnings of domestic cricketers have gone up manifold, which is true, but there are about 500 first-class cricketers in India and only eight IPL teams, which means a maximum of 160 players are required for the tournament and nearly 50% of those are either overseas players or the ones already playing for India. So that leaves only 80 places up for grabs for 500 first-class players. It doesn't sound that exciting anymore, right?
Even to get noticed and picked by an IPL team, one must perform in the domestic circuit.
So the problem of losing interest or clinging on to their places for money doesn't really exist in India. We agreed to disagree on various issues and like most discussions, ours too, ended without us finding any concrete solution to the problems we discussed.
Ciao.
Posted by: Samir Chopra at October 15, 2008 4:42 PM
Akash, thanks as always for an insightful post. Would you care to comment on the impact that the ICL could have in the Indian domestic situation?
BTW, I thoroughly enjoyed sharing a last name with you during the 2003/4 series in Australia. It made for good chatter with my Sydney friends, and some folks in the crowd!
Posted by: navanit(NOVA) Colone GER. at October 15, 2008 5:17 PM
being an opening batsman myself i learn from you a lot and love reading your blogs.thank you.
Posted by: Srivatsan at October 15, 2008 6:04 PM
Hi Aakash,
I would like to know how much does a domestic cricketer (I mean the ones who havent represented India) gets paid for an IPL match. Do they have contracts to..like the stars?
Regards,
Srivatsan
Posted by: Parameshwaran at October 16, 2008 4:04 AM
Nice read Aakash. While debating about the number of counties in England and the number of players, India has also a large pool of players statewise. We have about 20 odd Ranji Teams and each team would have around 20 odd players to choose from.
It would be interesting to see how many players are contracted by state teams in Australia. As I understand there are 6 states and I believe each one would have around 20 players contracted with them for a season...which means with around only 200 players (lesser than India and England) they produce excellent cricketers.
I thought its a point worth thinking about - do lesser number of players increase quality of cricket? or do more number of players mean more competition and there by highly talented players coming through?
Posted by: chewing gum at October 16, 2008 11:43 AM
Hi aakash another well written blog by you, How come you didnt end up going to England this summer? It would have benefitted you for sure.
Posted by: good friend at October 16, 2008 2:54 PM
It is not easy to breach your defence also! Nobody could hit your pads in ealry days of your career. Hope you have a longer stint in county version of cricket.
Posted by: Arya Yuyutsu at October 16, 2008 6:01 PM
Nice blog as always! Had a question this time around though. Do you think the ICL, along with the IPL, will help in creating a launching pad for aspiring cricketers? After all, putting both leagues together you'd have quite a few franchises.
All the best on your betting, hope to see you playing for India again; you so deserve to be opening for us!
Posted by: Manhar Patel (Toronto) at October 16, 2008 9:41 PM
Aakash,
80 spots is more than enough. If a player can not make it to their zone team obviously they don’t deserve to be in IPL
(off the topic!) If you are not hopeful to become an Indian test captain why did you take added responsibility (Delhi captain)? You should be focus on your batting and fitness only.
Posted by: Atul Kundra at October 20, 2008 2:25 PM
I saw you Ashish Nehran, Davinder Sharma, Mithun Manhas in my early days of childhood i played for a while in sonet club, to me you have been a excellent technical batsmen but unfortunately you have been able to convert your talent in Runs at the highest level as per your caliber when required.
Aakash Chopra opened for India in 10 Tests, forming a potent all-Delhi combination with Virender Sehwag during India's tour of Australia in 2003-04. He also made his mark as an exceptional close-in fielder. He writes columns for the Hindustan Times and Cricinfo, and is the author of Beyond the Blues, his season diary for 2007-08, when Delhi became Ranji champions. His website is here, and his Twitter feed here
- Does being prolific in domestic cricket matter?
- Is preparing sporting tracks so difficult?
- Implement Ranji format for the shorter versions
- The Duleep Trophy needs a revamp
- Domestic cricket needs the Kookaburra
- Central's resources trump East's resolve
- Local players made the difference
- Why Rajasthan got past Tamil Nadu
- Third day's the charm
- The anonymous world of net bowlers