too much cricket: How much is too much?
How much is too much? By Rahul Banerji
First Published by ESPN
India go down in their friendly against Pakistan at the Zayed cricket stadium in Abu Dhabi, their ninth ODI in 25 days. (REUTERS / Regi Varghese / Action Images)
There is at the moment, a fairly heated debate raging here in India over the amount of cricket the senior national team is being asked to play. While one side has it that so much of cricket is too much of a good thing, the other is of the opinion that there is nothing a cricketer would like to do than play cricket. That is, after all, why he became a cricketer and fought his way into the national XI in the first place.
Both arguments have their merits. I was on a TV talk show over the weekend where the two points of view were starkly outlined. The garrulous Navjot Sidhu was dead against the team playing so much, his contention being that it would at some point in time lead to burnout, a factor so often seen in professional tennis.
The articulate Ajay Jadeja -- when he had the chance of putting in a word edgeways against Sidhu's non-stop verbal assaults -- made a simple point. "I loved playing cricket, and if I had to do it every day, I would very happily do so," was his contention. Jadeja made a second -- more telling -- point. That players these days were getting far more chances to stake and make a place in the side than they used to, even a few years ago.
The great Sunil Gavaskar feels much the same way. He has in effect said that playing for the flag is such a signal honour that those who cannot take the load could as well stay away.
"I can't see the problem, these players are turning out for their countries, it's an honour to represent your country. I would be willing to sweat 365 days in a year for India. Those who can't stand the heat should stay out."
Yet it cannot be forgotten that over the last few months India have played 32 one-dayers -- a massive figure if we start the count from the triseries in Sri Lanka last August. Add to that the fact that even as I write, Rahul Dravid's men are back in action against Pakistan at Abu Dhabi in the first of two back-to-back games, which means that they will have played nine ODIs in the space of 25 days. This is overkill, and with a vengeance. Average that out and see what that comes to.
One major reason for this raising of the tempo is the Indian cricket control board's avowed intention of turning the sport into a billion-dollar business. To achieve the sort of targets the new dispensation in the BCCI is talking about, the squad will just have to play more and more cricket to earn all those millions and millions of dollars the smooth-talking new czars of Indian cricket seem so ready to talk about at the drop of a hat.
And what of the players? Are they consulted ahead of fixtures such as the ones in Abu Dhabi. Worse, one now hears of plans to take India and Pakistan to different parts of the USA, Europe, Singapore, Malaysia, and even Japan. Clearly those in power seem to have forgotten what happened six years ago, when cricket was brought to its knees thanks in part to matches being played in such vague and unnatural locations, which in turn attracted the worst sort of attention.
How soon we seem to forget the lessons of history.
How much is too much? By Rahul Banerji
First Published by ESPN
India go down in their friendly against Pakistan at the Zayed cricket stadium in Abu Dhabi, their ninth ODI in 25 days. (REUTERS / Regi Varghese / Action Images)
There is at the moment, a fairly heated debate raging here in India over the amount of cricket the senior national team is being asked to play. While one side has it that so much of cricket is too much of a good thing, the other is of the opinion that there is nothing a cricketer would like to do than play cricket. That is, after all, why he became a cricketer and fought his way into the national XI in the first place.
Both arguments have their merits. I was on a TV talk show over the weekend where the two points of view were starkly outlined. The garrulous Navjot Sidhu was dead against the team playing so much, his contention being that it would at some point in time lead to burnout, a factor so often seen in professional tennis.
The articulate Ajay Jadeja -- when he had the chance of putting in a word edgeways against Sidhu's non-stop verbal assaults -- made a simple point. "I loved playing cricket, and if I had to do it every day, I would very happily do so," was his contention. Jadeja made a second -- more telling -- point. That players these days were getting far more chances to stake and make a place in the side than they used to, even a few years ago.
The great Sunil Gavaskar feels much the same way. He has in effect said that playing for the flag is such a signal honour that those who cannot take the load could as well stay away.
"I can't see the problem, these players are turning out for their countries, it's an honour to represent your country. I would be willing to sweat 365 days in a year for India. Those who can't stand the heat should stay out."
Yet it cannot be forgotten that over the last few months India have played 32 one-dayers -- a massive figure if we start the count from the triseries in Sri Lanka last August. Add to that the fact that even as I write, Rahul Dravid's men are back in action against Pakistan at Abu Dhabi in the first of two back-to-back games, which means that they will have played nine ODIs in the space of 25 days. This is overkill, and with a vengeance. Average that out and see what that comes to.
One major reason for this raising of the tempo is the Indian cricket control board's avowed intention of turning the sport into a billion-dollar business. To achieve the sort of targets the new dispensation in the BCCI is talking about, the squad will just have to play more and more cricket to earn all those millions and millions of dollars the smooth-talking new czars of Indian cricket seem so ready to talk about at the drop of a hat.
And what of the players? Are they consulted ahead of fixtures such as the ones in Abu Dhabi. Worse, one now hears of plans to take India and Pakistan to different parts of the USA, Europe, Singapore, Malaysia, and even Japan. Clearly those in power seem to have forgotten what happened six years ago, when cricket was brought to its knees thanks in part to matches being played in such vague and unnatural locations, which in turn attracted the worst sort of attention.
How soon we seem to forget the lessons of history.