ganguly's so called 'unceremonious' exclusion from ipl-4 has once again initiated an age old debate...
when a player should hang his boots...?
the stakes in cricket has increased to such a level that of late, and not even at ipl only, there has been growing tendency to overstay the welcome... to stretch the sell-by date as much as possible... to squeeze every ounce of past laurels before being forced to say good bye and some don't even get that... they get 'rested' instead...
now i am of the opinion that a champion player should get the deserving send off respecting and befitting the services he rendered to his respective country...
but what if that champion player refuses to see the light...?
ideal situation is that selectors should keep the team's interest in mind more than anything else... that a player can never be bigger than team's cause or the game itself... but we don't live in perfect world...
so despite knowing the writing on wall... selector do hesitate to take that hard call... they don't want to be seen as villains... specially if that players in question has the potential to polarize fans and cricketing fraternity alike a la ganguly...
why not 'cap' the age then...?
lets say if 36 years is fixed for the retirement of a cricketer... everybody will know and reconcile to the fact that given date will be the last he will see his favorite player play... no over the top drama... no fuss...
selectors knowing the fateful date in advance cannot shrug their shoulders that they have been caught off guard by the mass exodus...
selectors knowing that the end-date is nearing can plan and groom players in advance without much bothering about the backlash of untimely 'rest' they will be forced to give some of the 'champion' players...
no deserving player will see his youth and prime form getting killed coz one 'great' player thought that he can still continue to milk his 'services'...
why not...?
can we 'cap' the age instead...?
shared by straight point on Sunday, January 16, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
I guess that would be illegal won't it? Retirement Age in most countries is 62+. If boards start mandating that players should retire earlier than that..
But again BCCI follows no government laws and got away with banning ICL players.
If you leave the legal issue aside, the debate would be how to determine the age limit and how to manage exceptions. Someone could be fit at even 40 and performing well so how do we ensure he is not forced to retire
gol... rules are not made for exceptions... once the age is fixed then there is no such thing as 'forced' in my view...
for every sachin playing in its prime in closing stages of career we have many 'champions' overstaying their welcome... so we have to see the pros and cons on that... which system will be more towards the minimum 'exceptions' than the one...
Beware my friend lest they call you 'sarkari' for introducing a retirement age. And you must be aware that in non-sarkari world, 'sarkari' is the worst gaali going around.
I'd be more intrested in chaps making sure that a minimum age is followed and a minimum qualifying seasons are put in.
Just because of one Ganguly, we cannot and need not introduce an upper cap system to complicate matters.
I would rather all good hearted people emphasize and focus attention on lower age limit...players should have at least so many seasons under his belt before IPL eligibility and must be of such and such age . Those are general employment rules all over the world in all fields. Only in India we have child labour on a large scale. That way we can protect potential Ishants and the like.
no sb... its not only coz of ganguly... look around and you will find many gangulys in waiting...
he has only brought this issue a prominence like only he can... :)
and why limit it to ipl only... even in bigger stage if one system can rule out more exceptions than the existing ones why not...?
tho must say that much like the upper age cap suggested by me i liked your idea of minimum age too... specially for highest level induction... test cricket that is...
Sp,
Doesn't Ganguly's case suggest that the "market" has determined he should retire.
My view is...sometimes the existing problem is better than the one we might create with a solution.
Agreed some people overstay their sell by date but creating an age limit is no easy matter. Also like retirement age, it will need to be updated with passage of generations. Also it may have to vary by format..
To some extent in ipl yes I agree market decided to cut short his prolonged innings...
Gol But what about international matches where players like javagal shrinath's crucial youth and prime form were wasted coz one great wanted to stick to get that milestone which after achieving it they say is just a number...?
And selectors knowing it cannot or don't do anything about it for they don't want to be seen as villain?
I must say minimum age limit makes much more sense. It would also reduce the importance given to U 19 performances and the manipulation of certificates to give a lower age etc...
Mouseman... As I said earlier tho I liked minimum age cap idea but tell me how it will solve this increasingly overstay problem...?
abeyaar khel ka romanch khatam ho jayega :P
yes i agree ankit... specially when who will retire and when is getting more interesting than the game itself... ;)
SP,
You can't regulate such a thing with age limits. Ultimately its an individual choice and Kapil was clearly not ready to give it all up and walk away. That was very much part of who he was.
Gavaskar on the other hand was so self obsessed that he was not willing to tarnish his legacy by sticking around. He retired when there was some cricket still left in him
Then there are the Amarnaths and Gangulys who are forced out. Rightly or wrongly.
I think Kapil was a once in a lifetime cricketer and not many have clout like him to carry on as long as he wishes.
Even Ganguly was forced to retire and the franchises gave the message loud and clear
Ya, not related I guess.
Anyway, Dada will just tell you that's he s a youth compared to Warne and Gilly who are being paid millions.
gol i agree kapil was and is once in a life time cricketer but at he same time it is equally true that he dragged his stay a bit too far...
so you think current way is the best way where we leave it on players to call it a day... and thereby force that fringe player get frustrated on the sidelines...?
mouseman...
even ganguly would have got millions if he was just a player...
ganguly comes with very potent explosive baggage that can go horrible wrong even at the drop of a hat...
SP, yes this problem you mention will happen only with players with clout like a KD (once in a lifetime)
Why bother making rules for such rare cases
Post a Comment