There is a huge debate going around whether India is playing too much cricket or not. I would like to reverse this and ask: Are our players playing too little international cricket nowadays?
Now before you dismiss this offhand, a good idea would be to define just what is too much or too less.
One way to measure it would be to count the number of international matches that Team India plays or better still, to count the number of probable days spent on the field representing one’s country.
Dilshan's role under scrutiny in no-ball gate
For example in 2008, we played 45 matches. That’s 15 Tests, 29 ODIs and 1 T20. Now if you convert that into days, then it comes to 105. That means if a player played all the matches and all the Tests went to the final day, then he would spend 105 days on the field.
Now is that a light or heavy burden? If you compare that with any other profession, then it sounds way too less. But players also spend a lot of time on traveling and training. So the number of days on duty is far greater than that number.
Another way would be to compare it with other cricketing years.
In 2007, the figure is 55 matches and 95 days on the field (since there were less Tests) while for 2006 it's 43 and 91.
Interestingly, one thing that is going down is the number of ODIs we are playing. For example in 1999 we played 43 ODIs. The days spent on the field playing international cricket was 93, which is in the range of 2006-07. We also played 122 0DIs from 1997-99, so that was the busiest and probably most traveled team.
Interestingly, if you look at the last 30 years, then the number of days an international cricketer has spent on the field has been inconsistent, but within a given range.
For example if you look at the winning squad of 1983, then they probably were the most over-worked. They played a whopping 18 Tests and 19 ODIs. That's 109 days spent on the field, greater than the 2008 figure!
We also played 17 Tests in 1979. So the number of days spent on the field representing one’s country hasn’t changed much after ODIs gained currency.
A point missed out is that the players of today play far less domestic and county cricket than their predecessors.
There is much greater rotation today
Now if, like me, you have been watching cricket in the 1980s and 1990s, then you'll notice one thing. There was far lesser rotation in those days. The same 12-14 players used to play all the Tests and ODIs in a given year. Players like Sunil Gavaskar and Kapil Dev rarely missed a Test or ODI.
In contrast today Rahul Dravid and VVS Laxman don't play ODIs or T20s. Sachin Tendulkar takes breaks when he chooses. Suresh Raina had to wait for 98 ODIs to make his Test debut while Yusuf Pathan, Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli are yet to do so. Even MS Dhoni took a series off to take rest some time back.
Then what of the decision to send a Raina-led young team to Zimbabwe? That rested all the seniors in one shot.
The current pool of international cricketers for Team India is probably the largest of all time. That also translates into less international cricket per player.
More of "other things"
But despite players playing less international and Ranji cricket they still look fatigued and more injury-prone. Why is that?
One of the biggest failures of the BCCI in the current decade has been its inability to handle injuries. Fast bowling has become a sort of Russian roulette and you never know which 2-3 quicks will make it to the team in any given match.
Stalwarts like Harbhajan Singh and Yuvraj Singh miss too many matches for their own good. This is one issue that needs a complete re-look and overhaul by the administration.
The Elite 99 not out Club
Then there's the IPL. While there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with the concept, the way it has been thrust into the cricketing calendar leaves much to be desired.
14 league matches per team are just too much. The gap between this and other series is also sometimes non-existent. Then there are the IPL parties and functions, which seemed mandatory to attend. The way the Champions League has been thrust into the calendar with the World Cup round the corner is also not a good sign.
Finally, there is the commercial compulsion of playing a fatigued or out-of-form player due to sponsorship issues.
On the whole, there are also more ad shoots, parties, functions, traveling and training throughout the year.
So the truth is that while there is lesser international cricket, there is too much of “other things”.
For the unbelievers, I present the 2009 statistics at the very end. We played 6 Tests, 31 ODIs and 10 T20s last year.
That's a mere 71 days on the field, one of the lowest in the last 30 years.
International cricket is a victim, not the culprit!
The author is a Bangalore-based journalist and blogger.
