W63L35
25th April 2006, 20:07
Wow......the debate is getting hot!!!!
Gavaskar likes the heat now that he has left it but players are burning out
Mike Selvey
Thursday April 20, 2006
The Guardian
It is hard, it seems, for some of the superstars of yesterday to comprehend the principle of burnout that, through a combination of greed and an almost total lack of understanding of the problems facing the top cricketers of this age, is threatening to engulf the game and materially affect the health and wellbeing of those players.
The latest to join the ranks of non-cognoscenti is the former Indian batsman and captain Sunil Gavaskar, who alarmed by the prospect of a players' strike hinted at by Tim May, president of the Federation of International Cricketers' Associations, has thrown in his rupee's worth. "I can't see the problem," he says. "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."
It is a bit rich coming from the man who in 1975, in a World Cup match against England at Lord's, blocked his way to an unbeaten 36 from 60 overs but who paradoxically heads the International Cricket Council committee that brought you the "supersub" fiasco to liven up one-day cricket.
It cannot have totally escaped notice that having finished their demolition of England last Saturday, the Indians were in Abu Dhabi on Tuesday and yesterday to play Pakistan, part of a series that in the next couple of years will see the two sides contest 25 games all in neutral venues - in the Netherlands, Canada, United States and England.
Were Gavaskar playing today he might actually find himself having to sweat those 365 days a year for India. Those who cannot stand the heat should stay out indeed, unless they want to end up on saline drips in the dressing rooms of Indore and Jamshedpur.
In the aftermath of England's tour, Duncan Fletcher again warned of the demands being placed on players, suggesting that there will be occasions where he is unable or unwilling to field his strongest sides, not least in the Champions Trophy in October that precedes the Ashes and the World Cup. It is only necessary to look at the casualty list compared to the situation nine months ago to understand his concerns.
What Gavaskar fails or is unwilling to grasp is the idea that it is not the volume of cricket but rather the sheer intensity of it that creates the problems.
A couple of weeks ago, in a different context, I wrote about Fred Titmus, and while researching some figures wondered how he had begun the season half a century ago. With three-day games back then, he played in matches beginning on May 2, 5, 9, 12, 16, 19, 23, 26 and 30. Only May 8, 15, 22 and 29 were exempt before anyone had thought of a Sunday League. Even with the travel between matches, things were more leisurely; Test players practised through playing. Eventually Fred did burn out, but not until 1982.
The contrast with England's forthcoming timetable beginning in three weeks with the first Test against Sri Lanka, or that of India, could not be more stark. With 24 Tests and 20 one-day internationals against them, Gavaskar is not unfamiliar with the responsibility and expectation of playing against Pakistan. However, anyone who has read Pundits from Pakistan, Rahul Bhattacharya's brilliant account of India's groundbreaking 2003-04 tour of that country, will see that the modern contest goes way beyond that. Dravid has played only 12 Tests against Pakistan, yet has gone beyond 50 one-dayers. It would do anyone's head in.
There is one proviso to this: India's players are immensely well rewarded, among the highest-paid sportsmen in the world. As yet, these players are not affiliated to FICA.
But this does not mean we should not listen to the rest of the world on this issue. When Brett Lee confesses that the petrol has run out and he is "bowling on fumes", it really does mean something. The home boards have a duty of care to state this in the strongest terms to the ICC.
Burn out or fade away? You won't find many cricketers agreeing with Neil Young's take on things.
http://sport.guardian.co.uk/columnists/story/0,,1757032,00.html
Gavaskar likes the heat now that he has left it but players are burning out
Mike Selvey
Thursday April 20, 2006
The Guardian
It is hard, it seems, for some of the superstars of yesterday to comprehend the principle of burnout that, through a combination of greed and an almost total lack of understanding of the problems facing the top cricketers of this age, is threatening to engulf the game and materially affect the health and wellbeing of those players.
The latest to join the ranks of non-cognoscenti is the former Indian batsman and captain Sunil Gavaskar, who alarmed by the prospect of a players' strike hinted at by Tim May, president of the Federation of International Cricketers' Associations, has thrown in his rupee's worth. "I can't see the problem," he says. "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."
It is a bit rich coming from the man who in 1975, in a World Cup match against England at Lord's, blocked his way to an unbeaten 36 from 60 overs but who paradoxically heads the International Cricket Council committee that brought you the "supersub" fiasco to liven up one-day cricket.
It cannot have totally escaped notice that having finished their demolition of England last Saturday, the Indians were in Abu Dhabi on Tuesday and yesterday to play Pakistan, part of a series that in the next couple of years will see the two sides contest 25 games all in neutral venues - in the Netherlands, Canada, United States and England.
Were Gavaskar playing today he might actually find himself having to sweat those 365 days a year for India. Those who cannot stand the heat should stay out indeed, unless they want to end up on saline drips in the dressing rooms of Indore and Jamshedpur.
In the aftermath of England's tour, Duncan Fletcher again warned of the demands being placed on players, suggesting that there will be occasions where he is unable or unwilling to field his strongest sides, not least in the Champions Trophy in October that precedes the Ashes and the World Cup. It is only necessary to look at the casualty list compared to the situation nine months ago to understand his concerns.
What Gavaskar fails or is unwilling to grasp is the idea that it is not the volume of cricket but rather the sheer intensity of it that creates the problems.
A couple of weeks ago, in a different context, I wrote about Fred Titmus, and while researching some figures wondered how he had begun the season half a century ago. With three-day games back then, he played in matches beginning on May 2, 5, 9, 12, 16, 19, 23, 26 and 30. Only May 8, 15, 22 and 29 were exempt before anyone had thought of a Sunday League. Even with the travel between matches, things were more leisurely; Test players practised through playing. Eventually Fred did burn out, but not until 1982.
The contrast with England's forthcoming timetable beginning in three weeks with the first Test against Sri Lanka, or that of India, could not be more stark. With 24 Tests and 20 one-day internationals against them, Gavaskar is not unfamiliar with the responsibility and expectation of playing against Pakistan. However, anyone who has read Pundits from Pakistan, Rahul Bhattacharya's brilliant account of India's groundbreaking 2003-04 tour of that country, will see that the modern contest goes way beyond that. Dravid has played only 12 Tests against Pakistan, yet has gone beyond 50 one-dayers. It would do anyone's head in.
There is one proviso to this: India's players are immensely well rewarded, among the highest-paid sportsmen in the world. As yet, these players are not affiliated to FICA.
But this does not mean we should not listen to the rest of the world on this issue. When Brett Lee confesses that the petrol has run out and he is "bowling on fumes", it really does mean something. The home boards have a duty of care to state this in the strongest terms to the ICC.
Burn out or fade away? You won't find many cricketers agreeing with Neil Young's take on things.
http://sport.guardian.co.uk/columnists/story/0,,1757032,00.html