EU challenge 2 player rule

[Richard Jenkins]

From cricinfo

Just when it looked as if the EU-player debate could not get any stickier, along comes a European Court ruling to pour a heap of molasses on proceedings. The case of Maros Kolpak, a Slovakian handball player who sued a German club for restraint of trade, means that counties could now be able to bypass the ECB's two-overseas-players rule.



Kolpak successfully argued that he was being unfairly discriminated against when his German club, TSV Ostringen, dropped him for league matches in accordance with league rules that restricted them to two non-EU players. The judges ruled that "such discrimination cannot be justified on sporting grounds" and that any citizen of a country that has an associate agreement with the EU should have the same working rights as a European worker, provided he/she has a work permit. This includes members of the Cotonou agreement, a group that comprises African, Caribbean and Pacific countries.



Until now an ECB agreement with Work Permits UK, the government agency issuing work permits, has ensured that only players of international standard can be employed to play cricket in Britain – players who would be unable to qualify as a non-overseas player under ECB registration rules. But the working holiday visa, thanks to changes made by the Home Office last year, now offers work permits to Commonwealth citizens under the age of 30 for up to two years. Young players with a working holiday visa, coming to the UK from a Cotonou country (for example West Indies or South Africa), could not be discriminated against by ECB's two-player restriction and would have to be allowed to play with the same freedom as an EU player.



"It's a worry for the game and for European sport," says John Carr, ECB's director of cricket operations. He and ECB's director of legal affairs, Mark Roper-Drimie, are in talks with other affected sports, including ice hockey and rugby union, over what steps they can take to protect the development of young English players. "We are looking at performance-related fee payments which will link county payments to criteria such as the development of young English players," says Roper-Drimie, who says that even an unwritten agreement between counties not to sign `Kolpak' players would be unlawful. "From the larger perspective there's little you can do."



This article was first published in the April 2004 issue of The Wisden Cricketer.
.

© Wisden Cricinfo Ltd

[CJ D]

Will this really effect things? whilst several Counties have taken the option to bring in EU national will they really want to fill their sides with overseas players who can only be with them until they are 30?

I think we will have to rely on the counties to be sensible with this one.

Would it be lawful for the ECB to offer incentives to Counties that field on average 9 or more England quaified players? You wouldn't be stopping anybody from playing just giving more money to those clubs that show a greater commitment to the England sie.

[Richard Jenkins]

From BBC
He is an unheralded Slovakian handball player who has never seen a game of cricket but Maros Kolpak is set to have the same effect on the game that Jean-Marc Bosman had on football.
Kolpak went to the European Court in a bid to play in Germany without being classed as a foreigner, claiming restraint of trade.

And the resulting ruling could see county cricket's current regulation of two overseas players per side toppled.

Slovakia is not part of the European Union but it has an associate agreement with the EU, as has South Africa and several Caribbean islands.

As a result, county cricket clubs could sign any number of South Africans or West Indians with a work permit.

Imagine Brian Lara coming in first wicket down for a county side after Graeme Smith and Herschelle Gibbs have put on 200, then Shaun Pollock and Jacques Kallis defending the total.

And imagine the effect on the England team if counties take this route rather than spending money on coaching and development for young, home-grown players.

In reality, international commitments and the amount of cash on offer are likely to keep the number of elite stars down, but lesser players could make the move.

"We've known about the Kolpak ruling for nine months and everybody is aware of its importance," Worcestershire chief executive Mark Newton told BBC Sport.

"In theory county teams in the future could have no England-qualified players.

"It's up to individual counties if they want to take advantage of the ruling but we're not because we have no need to."



CURRENT RULES

Counties restricted to two overseas players at any one time, although they can be replaced because of international calls
A European Union passport-holder can be classed domestic as long as he is classed overseas in his home country
To qualify for England, a foreign player must complete five years' residency in the UK


But other counties have expressed the belief it will only take one team to sign a Kolpak player and it will be "open season" for the rest.

EU laws have already allowed any player with a European passport to play county cricket without restriction.

Middlesex opener Sven Koenig, a South African, has an Italian passport while former Zimbabwe captain Andy Flower carries a British one after qualifying through residency.

Neither player is able to play for England but neither counts as an overseas player.

Together with last year's relaxing of work permit restrictions, the Kolpak ruling eases restrictions further.

England and Wales Cricket Board rules currently prevent players from taking a domestic classification in more than one country within a 12-month period.





But, just like those of Germany's handball authorities, these rules are likely to be overruled as restraint of trade.

Northamptonshire are currently threatening court action to make sure their Australian batsman Phil Jaques can be classed as a domestic player.

Player agent Eddie Tolchard says he is in touch with several players who could take advantage either of Kolpak or an EU passport but who are currently keeping an eye on that case.

"If the ruling goes through then they will be able to go back and forth between countries playing as locals in both competitions," he explains.

County bosses have discussed the issue but are currently stumped.

Suggested solutions have included a "gentleman's agreement" between clubs or attaching conditions to the annual ECB grant of around £1.3m per club but both would be illegal.

Former Zimbabwe captain Flower is already a domestic player



Newton believes it is in the interest of all counties to keep the England team well supplied.

"We all get a huge [cash] distribution from the centre and it would be a crazy business decision to not develop England-qualified players," he says.

"Our number one aim is to develop as many players as possible for England while remaining competitive."

Tolchard believes the one thing that will prevent the floodgates from opening is the standard of players on offer.

"They're not going to go for a 30-year-old who averages 30 in domestic cricket," he says. "They will only sign foreign players if they're better than what they've currently got."

But Newton is in no doubt as to the threat Kolpak could pose to the counties.

"Like any other business we are subject to European Union employment laws," he says.

"And under those laws there is nothing we can do to stop it."


My take
Counties could not (and imho should not)legally get an incentive to play only English players as it would constitute racial discrimination under the equal oportunities act, which dissallows financial disincentives such as payments to clubs who field 9+"english ""players.
The current rules state "international standard" players could come from eu and other associated trade countries. Not too many problems from EU countries, as arguably only Dutch players are of inernational standard. however, an indoor international game is played between EU states, so define "international standard" The problem comes from other associated states.
Imagine a county who could field an all star team. Ticket revenue would be amazing, as would tv, sponsorship and press interest.
The financial incentives would outweigh any input from the ECB or other funding bodies.
The influx of foreign stars hasn't affected English football, it has arguably improved it. So why shouldn't the same be true of cricket. The two player rule is cricket history.

[CJ D]

From the BBC this morning (the article that RMJ has quoted first appeared on the BBC website on the 3rd March 2004)

"England's cricketers union believes a funding change could help stop counties fielding extra foreign players....Bevan believes the England and Wales Cricket Board is already looking into ways of altering its funding structure, which currently hands each county around £1.3m per year.

"I don't think this would be illegal under EU law," he said.

"It would just be a way of recognising the work some counties do in developing youngsters who could possibly be selected for England." "

[admin]

Originally Posted by Richard Jenkins

The financial incentives would outweigh any input from the ECB or other funding bodies.
The influx of foreign stars hasn't affected English football, it has arguably improved it. So why shouldn't the same be true of cricket. The two player rule is cricket history.

I think you're probably right Richard. If European stars could play in our domestic comp it would provide a boost for European cricket and English cricket. More stars in the county game would bring more television revenue as it does for football. Trouble is the clubs have to decide what future they want and make a collective decision to go in one direction or the other.