Sri Lanka’s tour to England is in Jeopardy after 38 players refuse to sign contracts. Its days before the team is due to leave for the UK. The players believe that the contract lacks transparency and does not adequately compensate senior players. The Sri Lankan players have been out of contract since October 2020. They have been playing under a succession of temporary tour contracts. Hence, the number of players increased to thirty-eight from twenty-four from their previous tour.
The Sri Lankan players are not signing the contract because the player wants transparency of the rating system devised by the cricket board.
The technical committee drew the new contracts scheme. Aravinda de Silva and SLC’s new director of cricket Tom Moody headed the committee.
Players who have refused to sign the tour contract:
Kusal Perera, Dimuth Karunaratne, Angelo Mathews, Dananjaya de Silva, Dinesh Chandimal, Kusal Mendis, Niroshan Dickwella, Suranga Lakmal, Dasun Shanaka, Wanindu Hasaranga, Lasith Embuldeniya, Pathum Nissanka, Lahiru Thirimanne, Dushmantha Chameera, Kasun Rajitha, Lakshan Sandakan, Vishwa Fernando, Isuru Udana, Oshada Fernando, Ramesh Mendis, Lahiru Kumara, Danushka Gunathilaka, Ashen Bandara, Akila Dananjaya, Chamika Karunaratne, Asitha Fernando, Binura Fernando, Shiran Fernando, Avishka Fernando, Ishan Jayaratne, Charith Asalanka, Dananjaya Lakshan, Nuwan Pradeep, Sadeera Samarawickrama, Kamil Mishara, Praveen Jayawickrama, Roshen Silva, Minod Bhanuka
Why is there such dispute in between the cricket board and players
The cricket board in May had announced a five-point grading system to offer retainer packages for its contracted cricketers including the parameters of Performance (out of 50), Fitness (out of 20), Leadership (out of 10), Professionalism (out of 10) and Future Potential and Adaptability (out of 10) for a score out of 10. Players are divided into four grades A,B,C,D. Each grade further divided into three sub-categories bearing different retainer values.
The players refused to accept such grading of players as there would be no transparency between the players and the board. Also, the contract does not adequately compensate senior players.