Stoinis and David shine light on future of Australia's contracts system

Marcus Stoinis was all smiles when he fronted the media at Bay Oval in Tauranga on Monday, proudly back in Australia colours for the first time since last November.

His return to the Australian squad, without a national or state contract and having missed the previous two Australia T20I series to play in the Hundred, shines a light on an issue that has been bubbling away within Australian cricket for some time.

There is a growing consensus across many of those involved in the game spoken to by ESPNcricinfo that Cricket Australia's (CA) current men's contracting system is no longer fit for purpose.

It is a thought that has been discussed at length at various CA meetings around the country over the past 12 months with the current contracting system that was inked in 2023 set to remain in place between CA and the Australian Cricketers Association (ACA) until 2028.

Stoinis and Tim David, another who will feature this week in the three-match series, are two key examples that have highlighted the limitations of Australia's current men's contracting system and why change is being discussed.

Stoinis' absence from the five-match T20I tour of the West Indies in July and the three-match T20I home series against South Africa was notable. He wasn't injured and there was never any official statement that he had been dropped. All of which was a curiosity given he was one of Australia's most sought-after players at the IPL auction last year and remains in high demand as a franchise player around the world.

Instead, it was later revealed that an agreement had been struck with Australia's coach Andrew McDonald and chairman of selectors George Bailey to allow him to fulfil a lucrative AUD$409,000 contract to play in the Hundred, despite in Bailey's words still being "firmly in the mix" for next year's T20 World Cup.

It is not unusual for high profile Australian players to miss white-ball series throughout any calendar year. But it is always three-format players who are given time to rest ahead of Test series that are seen as a higher priority.

But for the single format or white-ball only players, the series against West Indies and South Africa were key parts of Australia's build towards the T20 World Cup as they attempt to bed a new playing style following the retirements of David Warner and Matthew Wade last year.

Stoinis' case is rare in that he is an uncontracted one-format player who does not play domestic state cricket, however he does play in the BBL.

While New Zealand Cricket (NZC) has been a global leader in managing casual playing contracts with senior players to allow them to miss international series to take up franchise opportunities, CA is only now starting to dip its toes into a rapidly rising tide.

CA contracted 23 male players this financial year, as they did last year. Australia's men played nine Test matches, 13 ODIs and eight T20Is in the 2024-25 contract period and used 34 players across all formats.

The 2025-26 contract list was heavily weighted towards Test-only players but Australia play only seven Tests in the financial year, with two against West Indies (the first of the series came under the previous year) and five against England. They will only play nine ODIs but are currently scheduled to play 19 T20Is plus the T20 World Cup.

Stoinis and David were not centrally or state contracted either last financial year or this one. However, both played the minimum number of white-ball internationals - six - to qualify for a CA upgraded contract which in 2024-25 was AUD$346,641 (not including match payments) and in 2025-26 is AUD$353,574. David has already played six matches this financial year. If Stoinis plays in six of the next eight T20Is against New Zealand and India, or by June 30, 2026, he will qualify again.

The upgrade system has been CA's longstanding way of rewarding those from outside the initial list after they earned selection to play for their country. But it may be past its use-by date for several reasons.

Firstly, players can now earn more than the CA minimum contract by playing for one month in a franchise league overseas as Stoinis did in the Hundred. But that requires an NOC from CA, or the players' state if they are contracted, and as was the case with Adam Zampa recently ahead of the T20 Blast finals in England, contracted players can be denied NOCs for franchise leagues because of domestic cricket commitments in Australia.

The MOU only allows a maximum of 24 to be contracted initially but there are no limits on the number of upgrades.

Seven players including Stoinis, David, Cooper Connolly, Jake Fraser-McGurk, Spencer Johnson, Nathan McSweeney and Beau Webster all qualified for an upgrade through playing enough games in the 2024-25 cycle. Three Tests, six white-ball matches or a combination of the two are enough to trigger an upgrade. Eight players were upgraded in 2023-24 which was a white-ball World Cup year.

If a state contracted player gets upgraded, which five of last year's seven were, they only get a pro rata pay increase from their original state deal for the remainder of the contract period.

The maximum state deal for this year was AUD$205,153, excluding match payments, although that is usually only given to a player who played both Sheffield Shield and one-day domestic cricket. BBL deals are signed separately outside of both CA and state contracts, but again the maximum BBL deal for an Australian players is only around AUD$200,000 and most are well under that while some overseas players are earning more than twice that much.

Stoinis and David have not pursued state deals in recent years. Stepping away from that system comes at a cost in terms of not having access to coaches and training facilities and full-time medical and strength conditioning support. Superannuation and insurance are other serious considerations for those leaving the system.

But it also means a player doesn't have to train on a state team's schedule and potentially be restricted from playing in overseas franchise leagues either during the pre-season or during the domestic season.

Those two players have bet on themselves and there should be no criticism of them for that. They have a set of skills which are highly valued in the franchise open market. But integrating them into longer-term plans for Australia now comes with allowing them to play franchise cricket elsewhere to maximise their income. That is where the limitations of the upgrade model are exposed.

There is a desire for David to be part of Australia's ODI build towards the 2027 World Cup in the finishing role vacated by the retired Glenn Maxwell. But the contracting system doesn't incentivize David to play domestic one-day cricket or even make himself available for the recent ODI series against South Africa, at the cost of playing in the CPL which banks him more than a state contract or ODI match payments ever would for one month's work.

It also doesn't incentivize him to rest for key white-ball series to get his body right, as he needed to do after the IPL this year. CA uses contracts to pay fast bowlers like Lance Morris and Jhye Richardson as long-term investments despite both having perennial injury issues. But not having a higher number of initial contracts means long-term management can't apply to someone like Johnson, who is currently sidelined and missed last year's white-ball tour the UK because he got injured in the lead in while pursuing franchise opportunities.

The reality is that even for a board with CA's wealth, there may come to a point sooner rather than later where they can't afford to pay all their top players what the market says they are worth. New Zealand has already found this out. Kane Williamson, one of their all-time greats, missed the recent T20 tri-series and Test tour in Zimbabwe to play for Middlesex and the London Spirit instead. He will also miss this series against Australia to rest after a winter in England.

There has been a bullishness in Australian cricket down the years that players will always commit to playing for the country above all else and there is still a widely held belief that dynamic won't shift any time soon.

Perhaps the recent example of Quinton de Kock returning to the South Africa fold is a sign that the franchise life isn't always fulfilling enough, although at the same time they won't have Heinrich Klaasen for next year's World Cup after he retired from international cricket to become a full-time freelancer.

Australia's domestic players have always been well looked after by global standards, but they did not miss the eye-watering sums offered in the recent SA20 draft. The timing of the current discussions around privatizing the BBL isn't a coincidence.

More contracts, higher retainers, more flexibility, and different structures are all being discussed. But the money has to come from somewhere. And if it doesn't, there is a chance, albeit a very small one at the moment, that Australia will join those nations battling to keep their players for international duty.