Cricket: Future contracts with boards at risk

New Zealand batsman Ross Taylor is playing for Victoria today. Photo / Getty Images

A survey of Australia's top cricketers has provided further evidence that the days of national boards contracting players might soon be ending - and it could have serious ramifications in New Zealand.

An overwhelming majority (67 per cent) of Australian cricketers believe players will turn down central contracts in order to position themselves as Twenty20 "freelancers", the survey found.

It also revealed almost a quarter of Cricket Australia's 25-man contract list would consider declining future offers from the national board to expand their playing options.

The findings mirror a similar survey in New Zealand in May, which found a staggering 45 per cent of respondents saying they believed an Indian Premier League contract was now the pinnacle of the sport.

This is especially relevant now as New Zealand Cricket and the New Zealand Cricket Players' Association are embarking on negotiations to settle the terms of a new Collective Agreement.

The most fraught aspect of the negotiations is certain to be central contracting and the ability of the country's top players to maximise their incomes in lucrative Twenty20 leagues such as the IPL.

In recent days Ross Taylor and Daniel Vettori have signed short-term Twenty20 deals with Victoria and Queensland respectively. To do so, they needed the blessing of NZC.

For now, NZC is bending over backwards to let its star players pick up extra money but inevitably there will come a time when the interests of the individual player will clash with those of the national board.

New Zealand cricketers are seen as among the most vulnerable to overseas approaches because they cannot earn the sort of money from NZC that they could in Australia, India, South Africa or England. NZC chief executive Justin Vaughan said it was difficult to say whether there was a momentum shift away from national boards contracting players.

"It's a really tough question because the shape of the game is changing," he said. "If you asked the players, they'd say international cricket is still the pinnacle event but we obviously have to manage the issues around volume of cricket, the context and how it all fits into a meaningful calendar. We don't want careers shortened because players are busy taking every opportunity offered to them.

"That extends into broader questions around how the Future Tours Programme fits into the likes of the IPL and other events like the Champions League. We're firm supporters of a window for the IPL, but I can understand why it hasn't happened to date.

"The contracting situation is subsequent to the whole playing calendar. If we can address the playing calendar, the issues around contracting will flow out of those."

Players' Association manager Heath Mills did not want to comment on the direction his members wanted to take in contract negotiations due to the protocols concerning collective bargaining, however his Australian counterpart, Paul Marsh, had this to say in the wake of the ACA survey findings: "I think Andrew Flintoff's [the England allrounder who turned down a central contract in order to go "freelance"] decision is a sign of the times and is reflective of what a number of players around the world are currently thinking. The reality is that the national boards no longer have a monopoly over the players' services.

"There are new, exciting and lucrative options available to players, and not surprisingly many are giving serious consideration to their futures. Our players are well paid, but a competition such as the IPL in many cases provides a package of more money for less work and therefore less time away from home. Tell me that's not a proposition any person would consider."

In July the Herald revealed that six internationals, including skipper Vettori, had delayed signing their NZC contracts to see how heavily their national commitments would affect their IPL availability.

Crisis was averted then: could it be just the tip of the iceberg?