Miraz
September 17, 2008, 04:45 AM
A neat piece from Utpal Shuvro
More than money
The exodus of Bangladesh players to the ICL is not so much about money as about a feeling of insecurity and neglect
http://img.cricinfo.com/spacer.gif
Utpal Shuvro
September 17, 2008
<table class="pullquote" style="margin-top: 5px;" width="320" align="right" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr> <td colspan="2" height="5">
</td> </tr> <tr><td width="10" height="1">
</td> <td class="photo"> http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/inline/content/current/image/369943.jpg?alt=2
<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2"> <tbody><tr> <td class="photo"> Why would youngsters like Shahriar Nafees spurn the name, fame and public adoration gained by playing international cricket? <nobr>© AFP</nobr>
</td></tr></tbody></table> </td></tr><tr> <td colspan="2"> </td> </tr> </tbody></table> After losing its way following the promises of a new beginning at the 2007 World Cup, Bangladesh cricket is currently in tumult. It's as if it has been shaken by a huge earthquake - an earthquake called the Indian Cricket League.
Since Sunday, when the news broke about the seven contracted BCB players, and seven others, joining the ICL, this has become the only topic of discussion across the country. Even the political uncertainties have become secondary. When the players eventually handed in their retirement letters and were subsequently unveiled as signings by the ICL in India, among cricket lovers there was wonder, despair, anger - and, above all, shock.
There's an easy explanation for why Mohammed Rafique, who has retired from international cricket, or Habibul Bashar, who is in the twilight of his career, joined the ICL. The same could be said of Manjural Islam, Mohammad Sharif and Tapash Baishya, whose international careers are considered largely over. But why would youngsters like Aftab Ahmed, Shahriar Nafees and Dhiman Ghosh spurn the name, fame and public adoration gained by playing international cricket? Granted, the ICL is an easy way to make money: play three months a year for three years, and get paid huge amounts - it's a no-brainer. But didn't any of these youngsters consider the fact that the ICL was forbidden fruit, on tasting which they would immediately become international pariahs?
Many in Bangladesh have muddied the issue by confusing it with patriotism and treachery, but I'm not ready to do that. These boys aren't going to rob or steal, they are going to play cricket. More importantly, the ICL is forbidden only because of the egotistical stand of the BCCI. Otherwise what's the difference between the ICL and the IPL? If Bangladesh's left-arm spinner Abdur Razzak has committed no sin by playing in the IPL, the likes of Bashar aren't doing anything wrong either by joining the ICL. In any case, this analysis through a moral prism is redundant; the ICL-bound Bangladesh players aren't protesting the wrongs done to the ICL, they are lured by the prospect of money.
That, though, may be simplifying things too much. After Sunday's news came out, the BCB revealed how much the retired contracted players had earned while playing for Bangladesh over the last three years. The regulars - Bashar, Aftab and Nafees - each received Taka 1 crore (approximately US$150,000), which isn't that much less than what they are rumoured to be getting from their ICL contracts.
For its part the BCB, trying to retain the rest, has explained to them that just the match fees for all Tests, ODIs and Twenty20 matches for the next three years will be almost Taka 1 crore. But only if the player plays in all the matches. And therein lies the rub of perhaps the entire issue - none of those who have joined the ICL could be certain of playing every game for Bangladesh, or of his future in international cricket.
Read full from Cricinfo (http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/current/story/369978.html)
More than money
The exodus of Bangladesh players to the ICL is not so much about money as about a feeling of insecurity and neglect
http://img.cricinfo.com/spacer.gif
Utpal Shuvro
September 17, 2008
<table class="pullquote" style="margin-top: 5px;" width="320" align="right" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr> <td colspan="2" height="5">
</td> </tr> <tr><td width="10" height="1">
</td> <td class="photo"> http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/inline/content/current/image/369943.jpg?alt=2
<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2"> <tbody><tr> <td class="photo"> Why would youngsters like Shahriar Nafees spurn the name, fame and public adoration gained by playing international cricket? <nobr>© AFP</nobr>
</td></tr></tbody></table> </td></tr><tr> <td colspan="2"> </td> </tr> </tbody></table> After losing its way following the promises of a new beginning at the 2007 World Cup, Bangladesh cricket is currently in tumult. It's as if it has been shaken by a huge earthquake - an earthquake called the Indian Cricket League.
Since Sunday, when the news broke about the seven contracted BCB players, and seven others, joining the ICL, this has become the only topic of discussion across the country. Even the political uncertainties have become secondary. When the players eventually handed in their retirement letters and were subsequently unveiled as signings by the ICL in India, among cricket lovers there was wonder, despair, anger - and, above all, shock.
There's an easy explanation for why Mohammed Rafique, who has retired from international cricket, or Habibul Bashar, who is in the twilight of his career, joined the ICL. The same could be said of Manjural Islam, Mohammad Sharif and Tapash Baishya, whose international careers are considered largely over. But why would youngsters like Aftab Ahmed, Shahriar Nafees and Dhiman Ghosh spurn the name, fame and public adoration gained by playing international cricket? Granted, the ICL is an easy way to make money: play three months a year for three years, and get paid huge amounts - it's a no-brainer. But didn't any of these youngsters consider the fact that the ICL was forbidden fruit, on tasting which they would immediately become international pariahs?
Many in Bangladesh have muddied the issue by confusing it with patriotism and treachery, but I'm not ready to do that. These boys aren't going to rob or steal, they are going to play cricket. More importantly, the ICL is forbidden only because of the egotistical stand of the BCCI. Otherwise what's the difference between the ICL and the IPL? If Bangladesh's left-arm spinner Abdur Razzak has committed no sin by playing in the IPL, the likes of Bashar aren't doing anything wrong either by joining the ICL. In any case, this analysis through a moral prism is redundant; the ICL-bound Bangladesh players aren't protesting the wrongs done to the ICL, they are lured by the prospect of money.
That, though, may be simplifying things too much. After Sunday's news came out, the BCB revealed how much the retired contracted players had earned while playing for Bangladesh over the last three years. The regulars - Bashar, Aftab and Nafees - each received Taka 1 crore (approximately US$150,000), which isn't that much less than what they are rumoured to be getting from their ICL contracts.
For its part the BCB, trying to retain the rest, has explained to them that just the match fees for all Tests, ODIs and Twenty20 matches for the next three years will be almost Taka 1 crore. But only if the player plays in all the matches. And therein lies the rub of perhaps the entire issue - none of those who have joined the ICL could be certain of playing every game for Bangladesh, or of his future in international cricket.
Read full from Cricinfo (http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/current/story/369978.html)