Shreyas Iyer and Ishan Kishan are unraveling the drama behind BCCI’s decision on player contracts.
Amidst the ongoing discussions surrounding the exclusion of Shreyas Iyer and Ishan Kishan from the crucial contracts list due to their absence from home tournaments, another topic of debate has emerged regarding the inclusion of Hardik Pandya.
The Indian all-rounder was included in Grade A of the annual contract list after committing to represent Baroda in the Syed Mushtaq Ali T20s and Vijay Hazare Trophy when not engaged in national team duties.
Pandya’s ankle injury during the World Cup sidelined him until recently, when he made his comeback in the Dy Patil tournament playing for Reliance. Although he has been training individually in Vadodara, Pandya’s consistent reporting to the National Cricket Academy for fitness assessments worked in his favor.
According to BCCI officials, Pandya has assured his availability for domestic white-ball tournaments if he is not occupied with international commitments. However, due to his current inability to bowl in red-ball cricket, as per the BCCI medical team’s assessment, participating in the Ranji Trophy is not feasible for Pandya.
Looking ahead, India’s Future Tours Programme includes limited-overs fixtures against Bangladesh, followed by the Syed Mushtaq Ali T20s and Vijay Hazare Trophy during the October-December period. Pandya has been directed to feature in these tournaments unless facing fitness issues.
While former cricketers support the decision to drop Shreyas and Ishan, questions have been raised about Pandya’s participation in white-ball cricket when not on national duty.
Irfan Pathan highlighted this disparity on social media, emphasizing the need for consistency in player commitments to achieve desired results. Additionally, the BCCI plans to mandate reduced-size players to report to their state units when not part of the national team setup to avoid conflicts with domestic competitions.
Despite efforts to encourage participation, instances like Shreyas and Ishan’s absence from Ranji fixtures underscore the challenges faced in aligning player priorities with domestic commitments.
FAQ
Q: Why were Shreyas Iyer and Ishan Kishan excluded from the contract list?
Shreyas Iyer and Ishan Kishan were not included in the contract list due to their absence from home tournaments, which raised concerns about their commitment to domestic cricket.
Q: Why was Hardik Pandya included in Grade A of the contract list?
Hardik Pandya was included in Grade A after committing to participate in domestic white-ball tournaments when not engaged in international duties, despite his inability to bowl in red-ball cricket.
Q: What is the significance of the BCCI’s decision regarding player commitments?
The BCCI’s decision aims to ensure players prioritize domestic cricket alongside international commitments, foster a balanced approach to their careers, and enhance the overall competitiveness of Indian cricket.
Conclusion
The exclusion of Shreyas Iyer and Ishan Kishan from the contract list, coupled with the inclusion of Hardik Pandya, has sparked discussions about player commitments and the importance of balancing national and domestic duties. While the BCCI’s decision underscores the significance of prioritizing domestic cricket, it also highlights the challenges faced in aligning player interests with organizational objectives. Moving forward, fostering a culture of commitment and accountability among players will be crucial for the sustained success of Indian cricket at both national and international levels.
My name is Mohd Ali, and I’m a digital marketer, content writer, creator, video editor, and blogger. Every day, I share information related to cricket and football on my blog. I reside in the city of Hyderabad, and I completed my graduation from EIILM University, Sikkim. I am the founder of newsblog4u.com.
