Under the Pakistan Cricket Board’s (PCB) revamped central contract policy for the 2026-27 season, the road to the top now runs through Test cricket and domestic cricket.

It is a landmark shift in philosophy. The PCB has moved away from the traditional A, B, C and D grading system and introduced a format-based contract structure that rewards players according to the role they play for Pakistan, rather than simply how much they are paid.

More importantly, the board has made it clear that the country’s highest-paid cricketers will be those who commit themselves to the longest format of the game. It is a bold attempt to change the culture of Pakistan cricket at a time when the national team’s performances in Test cricket have reached one of their lowest points in recent years.

The biggest structural change is the replacement of the old grading system with five format-based tracks. Previously, the players were placed in Categories A, B, C or D. Those categories reflected salary and status but did not distinguish whether a player was a Test specialist, an all-format cricketer or a T20 expert.

The Pakistan Cricket Board’s revamped central contract policy aims to put red-ball cricket at the forefront of player development. But the best of intentions might still be up against the reality of global cricket economics

The new system changes that completely.

Track AB is reserved for Pakistan’s premier Test and ODI players — the cricketers expected to lead the national side in both formats. Although these players can still feature in T20Is, the PCB does not consider T20 cricket their primary role.

Track A has been created exclusively for Test specialists. It is one of the most significant additions to the new policy, recognising players who dedicate themselves to red-ball cricket. These players may participate in the Pakistan Super League but are restricted from playing overseas white-ball franchise leagues, while being encouraged to feature in first-class competitions abroad.

Track BC is for players who primarily represent Pakistan in ODIs and T20Is, forming the core of the white-ball set-up.

Track C is dedicated to T20 specialists and franchise cricketers. In a major policy shift, these players can now participate in as many overseas franchise leagues as they wish, with the PCB removing the previous restriction. Their monthly retainers are lower than those in the senior Test-focused tracks, but the board acknowledges that they can significantly increase their earnings through franchise cricket.

Finally, Track D serves as a development pathway for emerging players attached to the National Cricket Academy and Pakistan’s high-performance programme.

The PCB has also tightened eligibility requirements. Only players who have featured in at least four Tests, six ODIs or six T20Is during the previous 12 months can qualify for one of the four senior tracks. However, simply meeting the appearance criteria is no longer enough. Every player must also pass a three-stage evaluation, consisting of medical and fitness assessments, domestic cricket participation and a minimum performance score.

Players in Track AB must play at least four first-class and four List A matches each year, while Test specialists in Track A are required to feature in a minimum of six first-class games. Similar participation benchmarks apply to white-ball and T20 specialists within their respective formats.

Perhaps the most revolutionary aspect of the policy is how contracts will be reviewed. The selection committee’s opinion now accounts for only 15 percent of the annual evaluation. The remaining 85 percent is determined through objective measures, including international performances, domestic performances and fitness standards. It represents one of the strongest moves towards a data-driven contract and selection model in Pakistan cricket.

In many ways, the new contract structure reflects an uncomfortable reality. Pakistan’s performances in Test cricket have declined sharply over the past few years. The team suffered two consecutive home Test series whitewashes against Bangladesh, struggled for consistency across three successive World Test Championship cycles and has rarely looked like a genuine contender in the longest format.

The PCB appears to have accepted that if Test cricket is to improve, players must have stronger financial incentives to remain committed to it. That thinking explains why Test specialists now occupy one of the highest contract tracks, despite having fewer commercial opportunities than white-ball players.

It is a sensible approach, because Test cricket remains the toughest examination of a cricketer’s skill, temperament and consistency. Countries that consistently produce quality Test players often benefit across all formats, because the technical foundation developed in red-ball cricket naturally strengthens ODI and T20 performances as well. By making Test cricket financially attractive, the PCB is attempting to rebuild that foundation. It is perhaps the strongest statement the board has made in favour of the traditional format in the franchise era.

Equally encouraging is the PCB’s decision to rely far more heavily on measurable performance. For years, discussions surrounding central contracts often centred on reputation, seniority or perceived favouritism. The new framework attempts to reduce that subjectivity.

When 85 percent of a player’s annual assessment is based on performances, domestic participation and fitness, it creates greater accountability. Players know exactly what is expected of them, while selectors have less room to justify inconsistent decisions. If implemented fairly, this could become one of the most progressive reforms the Pakistan Cricket Board has introduced in years.

Despite all its positives, however, the policy faces one enormous challenge: can the PCB really make Test cricket financially attractive enough in the modern era?

The answer is far from straightforward. The board can certainly offer higher monthly retainers to Test specialists than to white-ball players, but it cannot compete with the economics of franchise cricket. Take the example of Saim Ayub. As one of Pakistan’s leading all-format cricketers, he reportedly earned around 12.6 crore rupees from a single PSL season. That figure alone is likely to exceed what many centrally contracted Test specialists will earn over an entire year, even if they are placed in the highest contract tier.

Now consider a specialist T20 player. Under the new policy, a Track C player is free to participate in multiple overseas franchise leagues alongside the PSL. Those tournaments can collectively generate earnings that no central contract in world cricket can realistically match. This is where the PCB’s strategy will truly be tested.

The board has rightly increased the financial value of Test cricket, but the global market continues to reward T20 specialists far more generously. No matter how attractive a central contract becomes, franchise cricket remains the biggest source of income for modern professional cricketers, and that reality cannot be ignored.

Overall, the PCB deserves credit for introducing a policy that finally aligns central contracts with the demands of modern cricket. However, this policy should be viewed as the beginning rather than the complete solution. Financial incentives can certainly encourage players to value Test cricket more, but they cannot completely overcome the economic power of the franchise game.

Ultimately, the success of this new model will not be judged by how impressive the framework looks on paper. It will be judged by whether more Pakistani cricketers choose to build their careers around Test cricket, whether the country’s performances improve in the World Test Championship, and whether the PCB consistently applies the principles it has now promised.

The writer is a cricket correspondent and digital
content creator. X: @abubakartarar

Published in Dawn, EOS, July 5th, 2026