Two Out Of Eleven.?>

[Maranello]

If they have the same rights as Brits why does the ECB not consider them for the England team?

[Occasional Fan]

Good question, Maranello! There's definitely no legal reason why the ECB could not select them (and employ them) as far as I can see. However, I guess the point is that the ECB does not actually have a playing job that they can do, because the rules under which they field teams (set by the ICC and opposing national cricket boards) prevent them from playing. Those rules are not illegal because the parties to them are not all subject to EU law.

It would be interesting if the ECB was fielding a side to play, say, Hungary under a contract with the Hungarian Cricket Board, because both those bodies are subject to EU law. If the ECB then chose to field a team made up of Irishmen, Czechs and Poles, and the HCB fielded the present England test side, I can't see legally how the ECB or the HCB could object (it would be no different from a county game in the eyes of the law, and residence qualifications by reference to county borders are not enforceable in law). However, someone must have looked at this before, because soccer is played all over the EU and nationality restrictions certainly are applied to national sides.

As I've also said on this board before, Maranello, I'm not an employment lawyer, and I'm afraid I can't afford to hire one to answer your question! But it's a good question - bound to turn up in a solicitor's examination some day!

[Zainub]

Originally Posted by Maranello

If they have the same rights as Brits why does the ECB not consider them for the England team?

That would lead to quite an interesting sitauation really.

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan 27465

But, Zainub, as I've said several times on this board before, there's nothing that can be done about them. They have exactly the same rights to work in the UK as Brits. Cricket just needs to accept that one and work with it: it's not going to change.

I understand completely what you are saying OF, but we can't forget that the primary aim of setting up the County Championships is that it can produce players for the England National Team. If certains foreign players are genuinely coming in the way of other talented younger players who might be future england players than the argument for the rules to be re-looked at is justified, because as said before the primary aim of setting up the County Championships is that it can produce players for the England team, not be club which just exists to make money out of winning trophies, and being successful.

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by Zainub Razvi

I understand completely what you are saying OF, but we can't forget that the primary aim of setting up the County Championships is that it can produce players for the England National Team. If certains foreign players are genuinely coming in the way of other talented younger players who might be future england players than the argument for the rules to be re-looked at is justified, because as said before the primary aim of setting up the County Championships is that it can produce players for the England team, not be club which just exists to make money out of winning trophies, and being successful.

Is it? I didn't know that, and I am sure many would disagree with your claims. The counties have a role in helping nurture the talent pool, but the primary responsbility for selecting and developing future English Test players rests with the ECB.

The County Championship exists to ascertain who the best county in that season is, just as the Premier League exists to ascertain who the best English football team that season is, not to develop the England national team. That is why you have national associations.

[Occasional Fan]

Originally Posted by Zainub Razvi

We can't forget that the primary aim of setting up the County Championships is that it can produce players for the England National Team.

I rather suspect that is not the case, Zainub. County cricket clubs have been around longer than international cricket and I am going to take a guess that their constitutions do not contain development of players for international duty in England as a primary objective. They were founded for the benefit of their members and I would be prepared to bet that their primary objective is the fielding of teams under their own club colours and playing of competitions under their club names. (I'm prepared to be corrected, and Andy Mellon might want to get involved in this.) In any case, the rules under which sport in the UK works cannot override EU law. That is the reason I say that cricket just has to deal with the law as it stands.

Some people (especially in the UK, which is a highly Euro-sceptical nation) seem to think that EU law in some way discriminates against the Brits. It doesn't. There is nothing to stop any Brit pursuing his chosen career in any of 25 European countries without any formality of any kind. The reciprocal arrangement is that nationals of 24 non-UK European countries have a right to work in the UK without any formality (or almost no formality in the case of some of the 2004 joiners to the EU). In the eyes of the law, all 450 million of us in Europe have freedom to work anywhere. If a few hundred individuals in England have taken a decision to work as professional cricketers, thereby admittedly restricting their geographic opportunities, that is their look-out. The EU will not restrict the rights of 395 million non-British EU citizens to compete with those few hundred for their jobs. That's the world we live in, and we can complain about it all we want - but complaining about something you can't change really seems to be a waste of energy, and the ECB and all the county chairmen ought to divert their energy to things they can affect.

Sorry if this sounds like a bit of a lecture: I am unashamedly pro-EU and have been since the UK joined it in 1973, and I will continue to be so. I just wish some of my countrymen would get over the idea that the EU is out to get them!

[Ernest]

Zainub You have come up with a good point about the EU passport holders,before I joines this board, I was not just a BBC cricket poster, I posted on the political boards.
My views were well know there about the EU.
I will not delve into that to much, but I agree with you, that I would class the French or Dutch as overseas players just the same.
I dont believe in the concept of the EU, but that should make my answer clear, I agree.

So Maranello, I would not wish to see EU players in the England team, even if they had the greatest players.

If thats sounds political, then it is, and with respect to Zainub and Maranello in particular, you don't have to put up with interfearing EU dictates in Pakistan.

I hope you are not offended with this post Occasional Fan, but having voted in the original referendam under Ted Heath, and altered by Harold Wilson,to go into the then Common Market, I had no idea were it was going to lead, our country sold away with John Major, and the rest is going to be given away by Tony Blair.
I respect your rights to your views.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Maranello

If they have the same rights as Brits why does the ECB not consider them for the England team?

Not good enough I suppose, but, I guess they have made themselves available to England. I think Phil Jaques got stopped from playing here on a British passport because he wouldn't play for England, or something along those lines.

[Occasional Fan]

I'm not offended at all, Ern. You missed out Margaret Thatcher though (she signed the Single European Act, which effectively implemented most of the stuff which matters to me and upsets Robert Kilroy-Silk and Michael Howard). However, this one isn't a political board, so I'll go no further down that line. There's a general election coming up and we can express our opinions quite clearly then. And that's not a bad thing.

[Zainub]

Of coarse I don't see that as a lecture, as a matter of fact I very much appreciate being corrected if I'm ill informed, which I concede I might have been in this case, but ECB's position on this isn't clear, didn't they just recently offer special incentive to any county producing England players? It's all a bit confusing really, and I'm glad I'm not in a position where I have to make decisions.

My personal opinion Maranello and Occasional Fan is that any country's domestic sporting structure should be designed in a way in which it is conducive for younger players qualified to play for that particular country while accommodating foreigners at the same time. Question here is that are the current County regulations doing that? And are they doing that enough?

The whole situation is a bit of slippery slope really. If the counties are really not meant to be a breeding ground for English players and instead just meant to a source of livelihood for their members why not convert them into completely self autonomous bodies like footballs clubs that have their own shares on no limits on the number of over seas players (you buy as many as you can afford) and basically do what ever you want to...I'm not sure I quite agree with the current 50-50 approach - its neither fully here nor fully there...confuses me a great deal

[Occasional Fan]

Originally Posted by Zainub Razvi

ECB's position on this isn't clear, didn't they just recently offer special incentive to any county producing England players?

Yes, indeed. And they're going to have to be very careful about how it works. Any sniff of discrimination against EU citizens and the ECB will be risking action by the EU authorities. The fines, if they are found to be breaking EU competition law, would make the Zimbabwe threats (or non-threats) look like peanuts. It IS confusing, and I'm sure they will have had some well paid lawyers look at their plan very closely. At least, I hope so.

Originally Posted by Zainub Razvi

Question here is that are the current County regulations doing that? And are they doing that enough?

I don't know enough about the regulations to answer that, Zainub. I understand some of the concerns which people raise, but I just don't know enough to deal with them. (I do know enough, though, to spot some of the ideas which would contravene EU law, mostly because of the work I've been doing for the last 20 years or so and also because I am an EU citizen who has lived outside his native country for the past 13 years plus - something which fewer than 1% of us do, even though we all have the right to do it.)

Originally Posted by Zainub Razvi

If the counties are really not meant to be a breeding ground for English players and instead just meant to a source of livelihood for their members why not convert them into completely self autonomous bodies like footballs clubs that have their own shares on no limits on the number of over seas players (you buy as many as you can afford) and basically do what ever you want to...I'm not sure I quite agree with the current 50-50 approach - its neither fully here nor fully there...confuses me a great deal

Me too. Somewhere above I said that cricket is just a business for the clubs and just a job for the players. I think, probably, I'm about five years ahead of myself there, and that you're right - the clubs are part way between "real" clubs and "real" businesses. Cricket will be run as a business eventually: the ECB and the ICC are very clearly being run along business lines - and they're not small businesses either. The clubs in England - and maybe elsewhere in the cricketing world: I just don't know - are probably more like clubs than businesses at the moment. There's something about that which appeals to me, but I am not sure it is compatible with a professional game in the long run.