Fitness standards... or double standards?
Fri, Mar 26, '21
The most contentious aspect of the squads announced by Cricket West Indies for the ongoing Sri Lanka series was that four of our leading players in Shimron Hetmyer, Roston Chase, Sheldon Cottrell and Oshane Thomas were not initially considered because they fell short of the requisite fitness standards. It’s been some two years since Cricket West Indies (CWI) introduced fitness standards as a prerequisite for selection so there can be no excuses for these or any other players. Hetmyer has had the benefit of playing alongside the likes of Virat Kohli for RCB in the IPL and would have seen firsthand how passionate one of the world’s leading batsmen is about fitness; that should certainly have served as an example for the young gun from Guyana. Having previously missed out on WI selection for lack of requisite fitness levels before, this latest infraction is hard to forgive. The other offenders have all been around WI teams recently so it’s difficult to understand their lapses in fitness levels as well.
Prior to the World Cup 2019, CWI had announced "Player fitness at elite international level is a key ingredient of successful teams. To maintain and improve fitness standards, the CWI Board has now set a benchmark standard that is tied to eligibility for selection, using the Yo-Yo Endurance Test following the recommendation of our Sports Medicine & Science team". So said CWI Chief Executive Officer, Johnny Grave, at the time. Grave said the new fitness benchmark was a part of a suite of measures that the CWI Board had approved to help improve player performance across the board. "With the match calendar and the different formats of the game being practically a year-round pursuit, optimal fitness must be achieved," he said. "Irrespective of a player’s cricketing ability, a minimum fitness level is the bedrock for success for any contemporary sports professional" Grave added.
I’m particularly impressed with the notion that "Irrespective of a player’s cricketing ability, a minimum fitness level is the bedrock for success for any contemporary sports professional". CWI certainly seems to have adhered to this criterion as first Hetmyer and Nicholas Pooran, and now Hetmyer and Chase, have fallen victims to this policy.
While the introduction of a minimum fitness standard as a precursor to selection was both welcome and necessary, I must admit that as a layman looking in from the outside it was difficult to understand how it was being applied. Given some of the names that were being selected against those that were not selected for reportedly not having attained the requisite fitness levels, eyebrows were raised. Jimmy Adams, CWI’s Director of Cricket, made a subsequent announcement that seems to have addressed that.
"The policy asks for a minimum standard in certain aspects of fitness testing," Adams said. "It's pretty simple, and it's something all the players are aware of: failure to get to [the minimum standard] makes them unavailable for selection. As is best practice around the world, there are going to be times when players for different reasons might be unable or incapable of achieving minimum standards across either the whole battery of tests or certain aspects of it, and there are exemptions that are given to these players. The four main areas that are considered would be age, individual physiological limitations, their injury history and their training history. This is standard across many high-performance environments and we're no different. There are quite a few players at the moment who have been exempted under one of these four headings. It's not a secret. It's been communicated to players".
Having regard for the recent CWI teams selected, and against the backdrop of what Jimmy Adams explained, it seemed reasonable to assume that the likes of Gayle and Cornwall, and potentially Kieron Pollard, Dwayne Bravo and others, have benefitted under one or more of the exemption headings referred to. In fact, Adams identified both Gayle and Cornwall as beneficiaries during an interview on SportsMax following his recent announcement on the subject.
As a comparison, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) very recently introduced 2-km time trials to measure speed and endurance levels in its training programme for Team India players. According to the new norm, the benchmark requirements for the 2-km are:
• for fast bowlers - 8 minutes and 15 seconds.
• for batsmen, wicketkeepers and spinners - 8 minutes and 30 seconds.
• for elite athletes - around 6 minutes
India’s players are apparently given the choice of the 2-km time trial or the yo-yo test in their attempts to prove that their fitness levels meet the standards set by the BCCI.
Notice there is no mention of age or physiological limitations; the requirements are across the board.
When last I checked, there were no handicaps pertaining to age or size in international sports; not in cricket anyway. While is it understandable that one’s age and physiological limitations would directly impact one’s ability to attain certain fitness standards, it does not detract from the fact that, in a competitive cricket scenario, one will not be expected to receive any preferential treatment. A 40-year-old batsman should not expect the opposition to reduce the speed when bowling to him. Nor can he expect that he will be given extra time to make good his ground when running between the wickets. The opposition will not likely have regard for the fact that he may be slower in the field and, out of respect for his age, refuse to run when the ball is hit to him. Similarly, the player whose agility is compromised by his physiological limitations should not expect to be treated differently from his cat-like teammate, by the opposition.
Maybe the question to be asked then is, should CWI minimum fitness levels be attributed to cricket - the sport – as opposed to the cricketer - the individual sportsman????
Even at his peak, Gayle was never described as ‘swift’. For the longest while he has found it impossible to run ‘quick’ singles for fear of doing his hamstring; running a double is not even in his vocabulary. In the field he’s closer to being described as ‘immobile’, such that whenever he fields a ball cleanly it becomes an event that the entire audience, including his teammates, see the ironic side of. At their current respective fitness levels, Hetmyer is likely several times fitter than Gayle, possesses greater endurance standards and is potentially as skilful as the ‘Universe Boss’. It stands to reason, therefore, that Hetmyer is likely better positioned to bat longer and hypothetically score more runs, run better between the wickets, save more runs on the field and create more run-out chances than Gayle. So who is likely to benefit the team more?
By picking the likes of Gayle, what the board has conveyed is that if you’re immobile it’s okay, provided that you’re also old. By picking the likes of Cornwall, what they’ve reasoned is that if you’re not able to move around freely or run quickly it’s also okay, provided you’re much bigger and heavier than the regular cricketer. In doing so, what the board has effectively said to Hetmyer is that even though you’re fitter than Gayle – and likely several others who were picked ahead of you – we have not picked you because you’re too young. To Chase, the message is similar; even though you’re fitter than Cornwall and likely to have more endurance than him, the problem is that you’re too slim and physiologically able.
How can anyone justify these rationales to a young Hetmyer and others in a similar position? Is that a Fitness Standard or a Double Standard?
This is not meant to detract from any player’s performance, especially someone like Cornwall who, in Asian conditions, has been a matchwinner. Also, it stands to reason that allowances may be made for someone coming off injury, being selected and given time to regain full fitness. However, to say that Gayle and Cornwall are ‘cricket fit’, and that the likes of Hetmyer and Chase are not, is seemingly a bridge too far.
It appears that CWI may have given the likes of Hetmyer and company a few options:
1. get as fit as we, the board, want you to be and we’ll select you
or
2. remain at your current fitness levels, go ply your trade in the franchise leagues around the world in the interim and, when you turn 40, feel free to make yourselves available again and we’ll select you then as your current fitness levels will serve you in good stead at that time
or
3. lower your current fitness levels, obtain the physiological limitations of a Cornwall or Gayle, and we’ll select you right away
In international sports, when participants become too old or too ‘physiologically limited’ to be able to compete on even terms with their colleagues and/or the opposition, they usually either retire or are retired. The requirements are not bent to keep picking them; everyone has a shelf life or sell by date.
Some may say that nothing in West Indies cricket is simple or what it seems, and policies are nothing, if not window dressings. Try explaining that to the ‘unfit’ players!
Any surprises then in the diametrically opposite directions in which West Indies’ and India’s cricket have been proceeding, both on and off the field?
