Business of T20 leagues: How far can cricket boards go to draw the line for their players? | Cricket News – Times of India

MUMBAI: Former Australian cricketer Adam Gilchrist was a trendsetter in the game across formats. The man revolutionized the role of wicket-keeper-batters forever during his playing years.
Post retirement too, Gilchrist is turning out to be a ‘trendsetter’ once again. He has been the first among popular voices to go on record and say “It will almost be commercial suicide for Cricket Australia to allow a player (in this particular instance, he quoted David Warner) to go head-to-head” against the Big Bash League (BBL).

Gilchrist’s comments came on Wednesday and were in reference to the two new T20 leagues that are coming up in South Africa and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) from next year. These two leagues don’t just clash with each other where window is concerned, but also clash with the BBL – Cricket Australia’s own domestic T20 league – and it would indeed be ’embarrassing for the Australian board if one of their own T20 stars were to opt for an overseas league over their very own BBL.
“Commercial suicide is secondary. The primary worry should be the embarrassment it’ll cause,” said those tracking developments, reacting to Gilchrist’s statement.
The ex-cricketer’s reference to Warner in particular was just by way of an example. Be it the aggressive left-handed opener or Australian captain Pat Cummins, or the equally popular Glenn Maxwell, Mitchell Starc, Marcus Stoinis, Matthew Wade, Josh Hazlewood or the many other Aussie T20 options – Gilchrist’s comments just painted the ‘big picture’ that he wants the cricket board to be looking at.
“Imagine, Australia hosting Big Bash at home while these men are busy playing in South Africa or UAE,” they add.
But what exactly can Cricket Australia do to prevent this? In fact, what can any cricket board around the world do to prevent this? Potentially speaking, a player rebellion will be on the cards if the entire issue goes unaddressed in the most appropriate manner possible.
In this lies cricket’s changing landscape, the beginning of the end of all irrelevant bilateral, the further onset of a ‘free agent’ culture, and all of this eventually leading to just one possible conclusion – survival of the fittest.
“You see, whether it’s Cricket Australia or any other board, there are only three ways to deal with this. A) Give your cricketer enough at home for him to avoid venturing to ‘greener pastures’, B) Draw a line and say – if you want to stay contracted with your home board, you need to commit X number days in a calendar year, C) Make it free for all.
“Whichever way you deal with it, there’ll be repercussions. Asking a player to avoid venturing out will mean expanding on recruitments and working on salary hikes. Asking players to commit X number of days to home board will mean the prospect of rebellion. Making it free for all destroys the existing fabric and culture. There’s no definitive answer,” says a senior cricket administrator.
In an interesting development, the draft of the International Cricket Council’s (ICC) Future Tours Program was leaked to the media last week. This happened even as the FTP was not completely ready yet to be released to the media – which is one of the reasons why the recent ICC annual conference did not see the governing body share the draft with the media.
The leak coincided with ICC giving approval to one T20 league and the timing of both did not go unnoticed within the industry. This happened at a time when cricket boards were in the process of negotiating fresh contracts for media rights with broadcasters.
“The leak was embarrassing for the ICC because on one hand they are yet to release the FTP but on the other hand, there’s a public spat happening on a set of available windows,” say industry executives.
Meanwhile, there’s a cricketing flipside, and a brighter one too, in discussing these developments.
While the world stays focused on what call full members take, in terms of player participation, there are those who point out to the constantly growing ecosystem that cricket is catering to across the world.
“A total of 96 countries play the sport and are registered with the ICC. While we talk of the David Warners and Andre Russells of the world when discussing the onset of new T20 leagues, do we acknowledge the present of a Tim David in Singapore, a Zeeshan Maqsood from Oman, a Rohan Mustafa from UAE and scores of T20 cricketers from the associate nations of ICC who have the talent to belong to these T20 leagues?
“While bigger cricket boards fight to hold on to their contracted cricketers, these players are free to go and make themselves available. Nothing comes to a halt because an X or a Y is unavailable for whatever reasons. In that, there’s another bigger picture that will soon present itself,” they add.
All said, cricket won’t stop and therefore, the onus remains on all stakeholders to consider and take judicious calls going forward.
– The article is the second of a four-part series on the changing landscape of cricket.