After Ranji, Why Virat Kohli & Rohit Sharma Might Be Forced To Play Vijay Hazare
After the 2025 Ranji Trophy saw record crowds due to the return of Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma after several years, we might be set to see something similar in the Vijay Hazare Trophy, India's premier 50-over competition. As per reports, the two Indian batting greats could be asked to play in the tournament as a condition for keeping their hopes alive for the 2027 ODI World Cup.
The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), with reported suggestions from head coach Gautam Gambhir, had cracked the whip on the international stars by asking them to feature in the Ranji Trophy after the 2025 tour of Australia, which ended in a 3-1 defeat. One of the rules in BCCI's strict guidelines was that all players were supposed to participate in domestic tournaments when on a break from international duty.
Rohit and Kohli featured in a game each before pulling out due to injuries or vaguely reported reasons of practice, etc. Some other international stars did the same and very few featured in more than one match.
Rohit and Kohli have retired from T20Is and Tests already and their next ODI assignment is a three-match tour of Australia in October. According to Dainik Jagran, that could be their last international matches for the team should they decide not to play the Vijay Hazare Trophy, as the BCCI, with an eye out on the 2027 World Cup, would be happy to pick younger players, like they are doing in the longest format.
Kohli and Rohit both have indicated, directly or indirectly, that they want to feature in that marquee tournament in South Africa after missing out on the 2023 edition in the final. However, Kohli will be 38 by then and Rohit closer to 40.
Kohli was the highest run-scorer in the 2009 Vijay Hazare Trophy with 534 runs, while Rohit featured in the tournament multiple times between 2016-2018.
This development comes amid other reports claiming that Gambhir aims to end 'star culture' in the country's cricket. He would feel much more powerful in going for that goal after leading India to a 2-2 series draw in England, though his tactics were questioned and criticised.
view comments
First Published:
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
33 minutes ago
- Indian Express
As Houses pass Sports Governance Bill, recalling BCCI opposition to RTI
Rajya Sabha cleared the National Sports Governance Bill, 2025, on Tuesday, a day after its passage in Lok Sabha. Congress general secretary in charge of communications and Rajya Sabha MP Jairam Ramesh posted on X that the proposed law would 'result in the extreme centralisation of sports administration', and that 'BCCI will get most favoured treatment, not subject to any laws of the land like the RTI'. Under the provisions of the Bill, only a sports body that receives financial assistance from the state qualifies as a 'public authority' under the Right to Information Act, 2005. This effectively excludes the BCCI because it does not receive any direct financial aid from the government. The world's richest cricket board has over the years resisted being labelled as a public authority, despite recommendations from the Supreme Court, the Law Commission of India, and the Central Information Commission (CIC) to bring it in the ambit of India's transparency law. The proposed law will provide for the recognition of national sports bodies and regulate their functioning, and will align sports governance in India with the Olympic and Paralympic Charters, and with international best practices. The aim is to bring transparency and accountability in national sports federations, and open up hosting, collaboration, and funding opportunities. Since cricket will soon be an Olympic sport, it is necessary for the government to also bring BCCI under the proposed law. Clause 15(2) of the Bill that was introduced in Lok Sabha on July 23 said that a 'recognised sports organisation shall be considered a public authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005 with respect to the exercise of its functions, duties and powers'. This broad definition would include the BCCI — and make its entire functioning, from team selection to awarding contracts, open to public scrutiny. A subsequent amendment to the draft, however, said that a recognised sports organisation 'receiving grants or any other financial assistance' from the government shall be considered a public authority only 'with respect to utilisation of such grants or any other financial assistance'. This change, making government funding the sole criterion for a sports body to be considered a public authority, effectively put the BCCI out of the ambit of the RTI Act. The BCCI has for long argued that it is a private, autonomous body and not a 'public authority'. Indeed, it is not a sports federation under the Union Sports Ministry; legally, it is an autonomous charitable society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. It does not take direct financial aid from the government. However, the BCCI's position that its financial and organisational independence of the state places it outside the government's regulatory framework for public bodies, has been contested by several judicial and quasi-judicial bodies. In its 275th Report (2018) titled 'Legal Framework: BCCI vis-à-vis Right to Information Act, 2005', the Law Commission of India recommended that BCCI should be classified as a public authority, pointing to the significant indirect financial assistance it had received from the government over the years. The Report noted that between 1997 and 2007, the board had received tax exemptions to the tune of more than Rs 2,100 crore due to its legal status as a charitable institution. The foregoing of this revenue amounted to indirect funding for the board, the Commission argued. The report also cited examples of state governments providing land to state cricket associations at highly subsidised rates; for example, in Himachal Pradesh, the land for a stadium was reportedly leased for Re 1 per month. The Supreme Court has noted that the BCCI performs 'public functions' that are akin to those of a state body. In a 2015 judgment, the court noted that it selects the teams that represent India, uses national colours and symbols, and exercises a monopoly over the sport with the 'tacit concurrence' of the government. A committee led by Justice R M Lodha, which was appointed by the Supreme Court in 2015 to recommend reforms in cricket, described the functioning of the BCCI as a 'closed door and back-room affair', and said that the 'legislature must seriously consider bringing BCCI within the purview of the RTI Act'. In 2016, the top court referred the matter to the Law Commission, observing that since the BCCI performs public functions, there is a clear need for transparency. The Law Commission submitted its report in 2018 (mentioned above), and that same year, the Central Information Commission (CIC) passed a landmark order declaring the BCCI as a 'public authority', and directing the board to set up a mechanism to handle queries under the RTI Act. The BCCI challenged the order in the Madras High Court, which stayed its implementation, leaving the matter in legal limbo. Bringing the BCCI under the RTI Act would mean that any citizen of India could seek information covering not just financial matters, but the entire gamut of the board's operations. The public would be able to demand information on the criteria for team selection, details of contracts awarded for broadcasting and infrastructure, the process of appointment of officials and coaches, and the minutes of BCCI meetings. This would force the board to justify its decisions to the public at large, and not just to its constituent members. In its 2015 judgment, the Supreme Court had held that even though the BCCI is not a state institution, it is amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution because it performs public functions. This means High Courts can intervene in the BCCI's affairs if its actions are found to be arbitrary or against the public interest.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
England cricketer blocked from promoting OnlyFans in The Hundred
Tymal Mills (Photo by) England fast bowler Tymal Mills has been denied permission by the England and Wales Cricket Board to display his OnlyFans account logo on his bat during The Hundred cricket tournament in August 2025. Mills, who has played 16 T20 internationals and was part of England's 2022 World Cup-winning squad, joined the subscription platform to share content about his life as a professional cricketer. The 33-year-old left-arm fast bowler has not displayed the OnlyFans logo in his two appearances in The Hundred this season. The ECB's decision stems from OnlyFans not aligning with the family-friendly nature of The Hundred tournament. Go Beyond The Boundary with our YouTube channel. SUBSCRIBE NOW! When announcing his platform membership, Mills stated: "It's all about sharing my passion with you in a new way." He further emphasized that his channel would give subscribers "a closer, more personal look into life as a professional cricketer." Mills, who holds the record as the leading all-time men's wicket-taker in The Hundred, maintains that the material on his OnlyFans channel is "completely safe." The fast bowler has already made significant contributions in the current tournament, demonstrating his value to the Southern Brave team. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like How Effective Are Non-Surgical Treatments for Aging Skin? (Explore Benefits) AskLayers Learn More Undo In their opening match, he secured figures of 3-22 and scored crucial six runs to help his team achieve a one-wicket victory over Manchester Originals. OnlyFans operates as an online platform where content creators can share photos, videos, and live streams that subscribers can access through monthly subscriptions, tips, and pay-per-view options. The platform retains approximately 20% of the fees, with creators receiving the remaining 80%. Poll Should sports leagues allow athletes to promote their personal brands on platforms like OnlyFans? Yes, it's their personal choice. No, it conflicts with the league's image. It depends on the content shared. While OnlyFans is widely known for hosting adult content, it is not exclusively dedicated to such material. The platform supports various content creators across different fields and interests. This situation mirrors a similar case from May 2025, where British canoeist Kurts Adams Rozentals faced suspension from competition. Rozentals, who competes in individual canoe slalom, was suspended by Paddle UK following concerns about his social media posts, forcing him to choose between his Olympic aspirations and his OnlyFans account. Mills is reported to understand the ECB's decision regarding the logo display restriction. The ruling reflects the growing intersection between professional sports, personal branding, and content creation platforms, as athletes explore new ways to connect with their audience and diversify their income streams. The ECB's stance emphasizes their commitment to maintaining The Hundred's family-friendly image, even as professional athletes increasingly engage with various social media and content platforms to build their personal brands and connect with fans in new ways. This development occurs as The Hundred continues its mission to attract new audiences to cricket, particularly families and young fans, while balancing the evolving landscape of professional sports and digital content creation. Catch Rani Rampal's inspiring story on Game On, Episode 4. Watch Here!
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Chinnaswamy Stadium set to lose Women's World Cup matches as KSCA under scanner for not getting police clearance
Bengaluru has been dealt a major setback ahead of the Women's World Cup, with the iconic Chinnaswamy Stadium reportedly set to miss out on hosting matches for the marquee ICC tournament starting September 30, 2025. The Karnataka State Cricket Association is under the scanner as the failed to get the police clearance by August 10. An aerial view of M Chinnaswamy Stadium, in Bengaluru, Karnataka.(PTI) According to a report on PTI, the BCCI had directed the KSCA to secure the required clearances by last Saturday, but local police officials confirmed that the process remains incomplete as of August 12. The report further suggested that the Greenfields Stadium in Karyavattom, Thiruvananthapuram, has emerged as a possible alternative venue to host the matches scheduled in Bengaluru. M Chinnaswamy Stadium was originally set to host tournament's opening game featuring India on September 30. It is also the venue for four other matches between England and South Africa (October 3), India and Bangladesh (October 26), the second semifinal on October 30, and the final on November 2. The Karnataka government's tough approach has cast doubt over the city's future as a venue for major events, especially with the T20 World Cup scheduled for early next year and the IPL. The government recently denied permission for the Maharaja Cup, which was subsequently moved to Mysuru. The KSCA had to shift the ongoing Maharajah T20 Trophy to Mysuru even after deciding to conduct it behind closed doors at the Chinnaswamy Stadium. The state body was forced to move the tournament after the one-man D'Cunha Commission deemed the Chinnaswamy Stadium "unsafe" for large-scale events. The state government appointed the commission to inquire into the stampede on June 4 here, in which people died and several others were injured during the Royal Challengers Bengaluru's IPL victory celebrations. According to ICC regulations, the host association must hand over the stadium to the global governing body at least 30 days before the tournament starts, with no other matches allowed during that window. Despite this, the Greenfields Stadium is slated to stage Kerala Cricket League (KCL) fixtures from August 21 to September 7. However, KCA officials remain optimistic that the T20 games can be shifted to an alternate venue if the World Cup fixtures are allotted to them. "We have backup venues, if the World Cup matches are shifted here. But as of now we are waiting for a final confirmation," sources close to the development told PTI.
