Gavaskar slammed all-rounders acting solely as batters due to workload management.
In his column for Sportstar, Gavaskar specifically targeted all-rounders acting solely as batters due to workload management, highlighting KKR’s ₹25.2 crore signing Cameron Green as a primary example.
The 76-year-old argued that if players can bowl in practice, they must bowl in matches, demanding better commitment.
“A bowler can bowl only four overs in a match, and if they have bowled a similar number of deliveries in practice without issue, what is stopping them from doing so in the game?” Gavaskar wrote.
He made it clear that if a player cannot perform their designated role from day one, they should withdraw to allow franchises to pick a replacement who can contribute immediately.
“It is only fair that a player not fit from day one should withdraw and give the franchise the chance to pick someone else,” he stated.
Gavaskar dismissed claims that franchises were informed of injuries in advance, calling it a poor excuse.
“To suggest that the franchise was ‘informed before’ is not a great excuse. And ‘informed before’ is how much before the opening day of the tournament?”
Notably, Green not bowling in KKR’s campaign opener sparked significant controversy. When asked during the post-match presentation why all-rounder did not bowl, captain Ajinkya Rahane responded bluntly, "That’s the question you need to ask to Cricket Australia".
Subsequently, a CA spokesperson clarified that Green is managing a lower back injury and rebuilding his bowling loads, while also claiming that the franchise was aware of this plan.
Along with Green, other Australian players like Mitchell Marsh (LSG) and Cooper Connolly (PBKS) have faced restrictions on bowling from Cricket Australia, limiting their utility as all-rounders.
Moreover, several high-profile Australian stars like Mitchell Starc (DC), Pat Cummins (SRH), and Josh Hazlewood (RCB) are missing early games due to injury and workload management.
Gavaskar urged the BCCI to intervene and consider imposing a two-year ban on players who are not available from the first game, similar to existing penalties for players who pull out after being bought at auction.
“Maybe the BCCI needs to step in and… introduce something similar for players who are not available from the first game,” he wrote.
Gavaskar stressed that franchises, which invest heavily in players, deserve complete commitment, stating, “Don’t the franchises… deserve full commitment?”
Gavaskar pointed out that foreign cricket boards receive 10% of their players' auction fees as a "cash cow" for issuing No Objection Certificates.
“The IPL has been a cash cow not just for the overseas players but for their Boards too. Does the average Indian fan know that Cricket Boards get 10% of the fee a player from their country is bought for? It is not clear whether the BCCI or the franchise pays this commission for issuing the No Objection Certificate.
“So, to put this in perspective, over the last couple of seasons, there have been 16 players from Australia bought by the different franchises for a total of Rs. 121.65 crore. There are 12 England players bought at Rs. 68 crore, and from New Zealand, another 12 players for over Rs. 33 crore; from South Africa, 17 players taking home around Rs. 71 crore. There are eight players from West Indies taking around Rs. 59 crore. Do the calculations, and each cricket Board is making a tidy sum just to issue an email saying they have no objection to their player playing in the IPL.
“No other T20 league in the world, which has overseas players, pays a single dime to the Boards of the overseas players in their leagues. Not even the Hundred, which had an auction for the first time, since four out of the six teams had Indian owners, so why not milk the cash cow?” he remarked.