SO THE INDIAN cricket season has started, or has it really?
No one really seems to know, or frankly, no one really seems to care. At least in the BCCI.
The BCCI’s pet project – the Corporate Trophy – ended last week and made no noise anywhere in the media, unlike the previous years.
In the past couple of years the Corporate Trophy has had a few India stars featuring for the various teams and that has ensured some interest in the event.
But this time, thanks to the scheduling of the Indian cricket team’s international ventures, the opening event of the domestic season was starless and only had a few discards to speak of.
For those who might be wondering, the Corporate Trophy is the one-day version of the IPL, with a number of employers fielding teams under the BCCI banner to help players gain employment.
But the tournament has not been accorded a proper place in the calendar or in terms of statistics. Due to a procedural oversight, the statisticians, apart from those employed by the BCCI, do not regard it as a season opener or as a domestic List A one-day tournament.
Only the BCCI statisticians regard the Corporate Trophy as a domestic List A tournament. So any player scoring a career-best hundred or with a match-winning haul will have no mention anywhere else except in the BCCI’s Statistical Annual.
The argument against listing the Corporate Trophy as a domestic tournament is that it is played by teams of corporates and not states or provinces. The BCCI statisticians say it is the same scenario in Pakistan.
With BCCI showing no interest in settling the issue, we will have a tournament where players perform to empty stadiums and no one giving it official recognition, at least outside of officialdom.
What the tournament’s addition has also done is show to the world where the BCCI stands on the whole debate about the future of 50-over cricket.
In an era when every other board moved from 50 to 45 and 40 overs, BCCI was the only board to add another one-day tournament to its bouquet.
So now the Indian calendar has the Corporate Trophy, the Challenger Trophy played by three selection teams, the zonal one-day leagues followed by the Vijay Hazare Trophy (played by the zonal winners) and the Deodhar Trophy, which is played by the five zones.
This is apart from the choc-a-bloc first-class tournament calendar and of course the domestic Twenty20 events. While the world talks about the scheduling of the Indian team, maybe some attention could also be paid to the domestic scheduling.
The domestic cricketers play every week for five months. Those lucky manage to end the season in January, those not so lucky end in May with the IPL.
This is a far cry from the earlier years when the Irani Cup, played between the previous year’s Ranji champions and a Rest of India XI, kickstarted the Indian season.
That was also the launchpad of many a great career, most notably Anil Kumble. In the past decade the Irani Cup, was followed by the Challenger Trophy.
But all that has changed with the addition of the Corporate Trophy, and of course by the emergence of the Champions League Twenty20.
So a season which usually started in the first week of October, post the regime/officialdom change at the BCCI AGM, now starts in the first week of September.
At the same time the Champions League Twenty20 gets underway if it is not held in India. So players who can play Corporate Trophy are away at Champions League.
The Challenger Trophy or Irani Cup – meant to be selection trials for the national Test and ODI Teams – takes place without a real contest as the stars are missing. So you can imagine where really the problem starts when a new player takes time to settle into India colours.
If Champions League and Corporate Trophy are really here to stay, the BCCI needs to have a closer look at how the domestic season is scheduled. Keep aside September for these two events, but at no time let the two overlap each other or any other domestic event. All this is doing is devaluing the tournament.
The best example of that can be seen in the way how even when the Champions League will take place, the domestic Twenty20 tournament Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy will get underway.
The purpose of the Syed Mushtaq Ali, played on a zonal and national basis by all state teams, is really questionable since it works at cross purposes with BCCI’s money spinner IPL.
The argument from the BCCI is that it affords an opportunity to the lesser knowns to play Twenty20 cricket minus the tamasha. But does having another Twenty20 tournament really serve the purpose?
Four one-day tournaments, two Twenty20 tournaments, three first-class tournaments reads like an impressive opportunity for talents to be showcased. But it is nothing more than a colossal waste of resources.
The BCCI, like it does with the India team, seems to believe in quantity rather than quality.
The average domestic player is as dog tired as a Team India player when he lands up for the IPL, and thereafter just goes through the motions for the rest of the year.
Deodhar Trophy was almost scrapped a couple of seasons ago due to a crowded schedule. But it had to be brought back when the Maharashtra political parties staged protests over the perceived insult to a Marathi legend.
With so many agendas at play, there is hardly a wonder why the India story in cricket is like a bubble waiting to burst.
FOOTNOTE – The government of India’s Sports Bill talks about the presence of at least 25 per cent of sportspersons in decision making posts in federations.
Well here’s something for the Government to consider. The BCCI’s technical committee has been headed by Sunil Gavaskar (no less) for more than a decade and a half.
The committee, which includes eminent cricketers and umpires, meets just once every year or sometimes never.
Maybe that is something for Ajay Maken to study more closely before he fights his own cabinet on the bill.
This column is penned by an Industry Veteran who chooses to remain anonymous for reasons that it would compromise his corporate position if he were to reveal his identity. The only remit that SportzPower has given The Insider is this – that the commentary should have no compromise on fact and that the effort should be directed towards the betterment of sport and the institutions that represent sport.
