Why Kishan and Iyer missed out on BCCI contracts

The BCCI release announcing the contracts ended with an uncharacteristic piece of information: “The BCCI has recommended that all athletes give precedence to participating in domestic cricket during periods when they are not representing the national team.”

When Kishan was not selected for the Tests against England, India coach Rahul Dravid said that he hadn’t yet made himself available, and that he would have to play some kind of domestic cricket to be eligible for a comeback. ESPNcricinfo understands the team management had got in touch with him during the on-going Test series against England, but Kishan said he was not ready yet. In his absence, Dhruv Jurel debuted and won the Player-of-the-Match award in his second Test.

Iyer’s absence seems to be a disagreement with the fitness assessment done by the NCA. ESPNcricinfo has learnt that after the second Test, Iyer expressed discomfort in his back when playing long innings, but the medical staff cleared him of any injury. When Iyer was left out for the third and fourth Tests, the BCCI didn’t offer any reason. When he didn’t turn up for Mumbai in the next week’s Ranji Trophy match, Mumbai Cricket Association sources said he had back spasms.

ESPNcricinfo has learnt that the selectors, who make the recommendations for contracts, were not pleased that Kishan used this time away from the game to train with his IPL captain Hardik Pandya in Baroda, and that Iyer was at Kolkata Knight Riders’ pre-season camp when missing the match for Mumbai. Iyer has since made himself available for Mumbai’s semi-final match in the Ranji Trophy.

“The selectors don’t doubt their ability,” a BCCI official told ESPNcricinfo. “But if the NCA is saying you are fit and you are not making yourself available for the Test series, how can the BCCI offer you a contract?

“After the IPL, if they happen to get selected and fulfil the criteria of the number of matches required for a pro-rata contract, they will be awarded a contract.”

The ability of Iyer and Kishan is not in any doubt. In fact, India waited till the last possible moment before the ODI World Cup to give Iyer every chance to get back to full fitness. Kishan is an ODI double-centurion, who was India’s Test wicketkeeper in Rishabh Pant’s absence until KL Rahul was also selected as a wicketkeeper for the South Africa tour. Even if Kishan had reasons to believe Rahul might have been preferred in the Tests in South Africa, in which case he decided to tend to his personal matters, his refusal to play for Jharkhand but getting ready for the IPL has not sat well with the selectors.

This was perhaps the “severe implications” that Shah warned the players of in the letter, in which he also wrote that players prioritising the IPL over domestic cricket was unprecedented. Now the BCCI seems to have made a tangible statement to address the conflict.