Why Dravid's fear of Indian players being allowed to appear in overseas T20 leagues is unfounded

CHENNAI: Rahul Dravid and Rohit Sharma contradicted each other in their respective post-match conferences on Thursday. While the latter threw the bowlers under the bus, the former conceded they were a few runs short at the 15-overs mark. Dravid, who was appointed as coach following the last World Cup in the UAE, made another curious remark.

When asked if Indian players would have benefited if they took part in the Big Bash League — Australia's domestic T20 league — the former Indian skipper gave a rather elaborate answer. The question, in full, was: "Rahul, one of the differences between India and England here is obviously the England guys, everyone on that team has played Big Bash or got experience playing here. We haven't seen Indian players allowed to play overseas T20 leagues the entire time of the IPL. Can you see that ever-changing, and do you think it would help in sort of a holistic cricket sense?"

Dravid's response, in full. was: "I mean, sure, there's no doubt about it the fact that England — a lot of their players have come here and played. In this tournament, it certainly showed. It's tough. I think it's very difficult for Indian cricket because a lot of these tournaments happen right at the peak of our season.

"I think it's a huge challenge for us. Yes, I think a lot of our boys maybe do miss out on the opportunities of playing in a lot of these leagues, but if you were to — it's really up to the BCCI to make that decision, but the thing is it's right in the middle of our season, and with the kind of demand there would be for Indian players, if you allowed all the Indian players to play in these leagues, we would not have domestic cricket. Our domestic trophy, our Ranji trophy would be finished, and that would mean Test cricket would be finished.

"I know a lot of people talk about it, but we have to be very careful when we — we have to understand the challenges that Indian cricket faces or the BCCI would face in a situation like this. You'd see all our boys — like a lot of boys being asked to play leagues right bang in the middle of our season.

"We've seen what that's done to West Indian cricket, and I would definitely not want Indian cricket to go that way. It would certainly affect our Ranji trophy; it would affect Test cricket. Indian boys playing Test cricket is pretty important for the Test game, as well, I would think."

There's a lot to unpick in this answer. Before coming to Dravid's fear that India would go the West Indies way if it were allowed, his opinion that 'we would not have domestic cricket (if Indian players were allowed to play in foreign leagues)' is questionable, to say the least.

For starters, most of India's established white-ball players and the ones on the immediate periphery — the ones who would benefit the most by being exposed to multiple T20 conditions in multiple parts of the world — anyway don't play in the Ranji Trophy.

To be fair, most of them are busy playing international cricket elsewhere at that time of the season (for example, a part of this year's Ranji Trophy overlaps with an away series against Bangladesh). But when they are free, it's not like they are in a hurry to turn up for their domestic sides.  

Here's an example of a few players that will drive home this point. Deepak Hooda and Sanju Samson last played a First Class match in December 2019. Yuzvendra Chahal? December 2018. Rohit? 2016. Hardik Pandya? 2018. The Ranji Trophy continues to churn out quality red-ball players without the presence of the above-mentioned international cricketers.

How can players benefit if they go out? Alex Hales, who destroyed India's spinners on Thursday (38 from 22), made it a habit of playing franchise T20 cricket in Bangladesh for a number of years. When you can hit spin in Bangladesh, you generally feel invincible against spin anywhere else. Hales is also a regular in the BBL and it showed in his last three innings.  

Coming to Dravid's next point that these leagues happen during India's domestic season. That is patently not true. Both the Blast (England's franchise league) and the Caribbean Premier League (West Indies' franchise league) usually take place in the off-season. What stops the decision-makers from giving the license to the likes of Samson, Chahal, Hooda and so on — the players next off the rank — to put themselves in the shop window to play in overseas leagues when it's not clashing? The other issue here at play is it's not like BCCI has a total ban.

Heck, this year the likes of Shubman Gill and Mohammed Siraj (both of them very much in the red-ball scheme of things as well) played for English county sides during the Duleep Trophy. If the BCCI can give permission for that, why are they averse to allowing white-ball specialists to pick up gigs elsewhere? Only the BCCI can say why. From the available evidence, they are loath to even see players in other leagues without their permission. In 2019, BCCI sent a show cause notice to Dinesh Karthik because he was in person for a CPL game in Port-of-Spain at the request of Brendon McCullum, who was KKR's new coach. That this constituted a violation of a clause in Karthik's BCCI's contract is laughable to say the least.  

Speaking of the West Indies, Dravid's theory that their cricket suffered as a result of their players being allowed to play elsewhere doesn't pass the smell test. One of the earliest crises began in 2011 when, following a dispute between the board and senior players, Chris Gayle turned his back on West Indies to play for Bangalore in the IPL. This was before many of the T20 leagues came into being (to put it into perspective, CPL began in 2013). Also, it's counter-productive to cite a West Indies example. No side has benefited as much from franchise cricket as them. They have won the whole thing twice in the last decade.India? The Indian Premier League may be the best T20 product out there but since its inception, India have picked zero T20 World Cups. Both Dravid and Rohit will agree on that point.