Cricketers or businessmen?

How many of you agree with Alan?

Lure of Lucre

I for one, don't agree with him.

Playing for your country still got to be one's topmost aim. And I'm glad that Murali Kartik is still desperate for more India caps despite being financially secure.

Representing your country is simply not just about earning your livelihood rather one should be fiercely proud that he is one of millions chosen to represent his country at an int'l stage.

Don't know how much role did lure of lucre play in Freddie's decision to bid adieu to test cricket and become a freelancer in shorter forms of the game.

Knowing his propensity to get injured, I've bit of an idea that how much pain he might've had to endure to play as many tests as he eventually did for Eng.

Flintoff , Gilchrist and Hayden have all had long successful International careers before their IPL contracts

He should be using players like Marsh , Mascarenhas , Lumb , D Hussey or Dwayne Smith as examples

Flintoff , Gilchrist and Hayden have all had long successful International careers before their IPL contracts

Precisely.

To accuse the likes of Gilly and Hayden of abandoning their int'l careers for want of lucre is silly, downrightly silly.

Isn't it true that Hayden wanted to play int'l cricket longer than he was allowed to play by CA?

'Cash for comment' article.

Flintoff is a businessman who is playing cricket, not a cricketer who wants to earn business.

About sums it up for me - and applies to just about every cricketer playing in the IPL.
They're there for the money - the end.

If the younger ones (or indeed Kartik) believe that they're there to impress their selectors into picking them for senior test/odi/t20 squads on the back of "form" shown in the IPL circus arena, then they'd be sadly disillusioned.

Take the piss, have some fun, bank the money and move on back to the day job when the tents come down.

These articles make me laugh.

Cricket started off like anything else as a hobby played between a very select band of people.

Then when the money came in, so did 'professionals.'

They didn't represent their country out of the good of their hearts.

They're not volunteers, they're grown men with a CAREER.

Since time immemorial they have been playing for the money.

All the IPL is is a continuation of that.

It's laughable that fans of modern sport are stupid enough to believe all the babble about loyalty, patriotism and whatever other nonsense you have heard of late. Sport tries to pretend it's different to other kinds of business by creating this intangible bond between itself and its customer base - the fans. Any of you who are stupid enough to buy it deserve to spend your time whining about big 'orrible Flintoff and Pietersen going to sustain their mega-millionaire lifestyles by raking in the cash.

Just because they do that, doesn't mean anything has changed either. You can be loyal to two things in life.

Wave enough filthy stuff and they will come.

what a shite article. on so many levels.

Alan Wilkins touches a few points that are worth consideration. Even though he doesn’t state it as a fact, by mentioning his playing period, one can and should infer that Murali Kartik played test/ODI cricket under a captain whose disdain for left arm spinners was well documented. Dropping him from the squad that toured Australia when he was at the peak of his career is a case in point. There may have been other compatibility issues that played a role too. Nonetheless, Murali Kartik, as a valuable cricketer, was given a raw deal. There can be no doubt about that.

Expecting to be brought back into a squad for T20 at the age of 33 is a big ask, if you don’t happen to be a Sachin. In as much as Alan suggests that Kartik readjust his priorities, I agree with him. Yet, bringing in the likes of Gilchrist, Hayden, etc as examples defeats the very purpose of his article. KP, Lumb, Warner and a few others would be more appropriate as these are in the midst of their careers..

IMO, Murali should pocket what he can get, anywhere in the world, in any format or platform of cricket (commentating) and stop wanting to play for India. His English is good, he is articulate and his expertise will definitely carry more authority than some idiots from Madras who give advice on how a batsman should play his shots, when he himself never batted above 11.

Wilkins played for my club many moons ago

Useless fact of the day ?

mirchy wrote:..
IMO, Murali should pocket what he can get, anywhere in the world, in any format or platform of cricket (commentating) and stop wanting to play for India. His English is good, he is articulate and his expertise will definitely carry more authority than some idiots from Madras who give advice on how a batsman should play his shots, when he himself never batted above 11.

He's always welcome back at Middlesex.
Nice guy, good pro and the perfect foil for the sh*te tossed up from an ageing Shaun Udal at the other end.

Merlin wrote:He's always welcome back at Middlesex.
Nice guy, good pro and the perfect foil for the sh*te tossed up from an ageing Shaun Udal at the other end.

TBH, I think his stint at Middlesex helped him immensely to mature as a bowler. He also carries a very level head on his shoulders. Maybe his playing days for the national team are over but he will probably continue to bowl in the Ranji Trophy. I saw Shaun Udal once in Bombay (I think it was). Never did impress me, but that may have been his age. I think he was 36/37 then.

We still wonder what Udal did to "impress" Gus Fraser to have been given a reprieve at Middlesex after he went past his "sell-by" date at Sussex.

Fraser "believes in his abilities" ... the rest of us supporters keep looking for the signs of said "abilities" !

PS - And he's 2 years older than when you last saw him!

In fact Zaheer Khan's stint with Worcs in 2006 turned his career around for the better too. India has benefited from his return. I think generally aspiring international criketers should move around when they are out of season in domestic cricket.