Overseas players, Good or Bad

[gibbs_fan]

Hi All.

I would like to hear your thoughts on the impact of overseas players in the county championship.

Below, is the way I see it.

Firstly, I love to watch all forms of the game no matter which teams are playing. I try to attend all the cricket matches played at Newlands ( in Cape Town). What concerns me is that every season, less and less people attend the cricket matches. Its so bad here in SA that we dont even get to see our 4 -day competition matches on tv. This brings me to county cricket. From what I read, I understand that cricket in England is suppotted quiet well. I believe that a factor could be that in England you get to see many good players from all over the world. I mean I would be happy to pay to see the likes of Warne, Fleming, etc. I always check the latest scores on cricinfo to see the updates on county matches (Pity they dont show some county matches on tv here in SA). I also believe that these overseas players bring the best out of the local players as well. These are some of the upsides of overseas players

Unfortunately, there are also downsides. More overseas players means that there are less positions available for the local guys. Also I feel that the gap between the overseas players and the local players is quite big (possibly as a result of too few local lads getting enough opportunities). For example whenever I check the scores, I rarely find an overseas player who does'nt perform. Does this mean that the standard of county cricket is not as high as is expected. Since I am from SA, I speak with respect to SA leagues. Take Lance Klusener for example. Every week he score a century, yet last season in SA league he was much less prolific with the bat. Other examples are Martin van Jaarsveld, Dale Benkenstein, Justin Kemp, Andrew Hall, Jonathan Trott, Nic Pothas, they all average much more in England than in SA. Then we get the bowlers, Kemp does not even get to bowl in SA but he took a number of wickets in England. Deon Kruis, was a useful bowler in SA but almost every game in England, he takes a five fer. Charl Willoughby, well he is just a remarkable bowler ( wickets in SA and England). On the other hand, I am delighted to see people like Knight, Ramprakash, Solanki, Butcher, Hick, still making big scores consistently. I am also pleased to see players like Caddick doing well. My only concern is that there are too few English guys doing well. I see the Australian and New Zealand players are doing very well in the county leagues. The Pakistani bowler seem to take the most wickets in the league ( Rana, Mushi, etc).

Then there are players like Sajid Mahmood, Stuart Broad, Alistair Cook, Ian Bell, to name a few, who have done exceptionally well and deserved their call ups. But one should ask the question. Have the overseas players helped in the development of these players or are they just natural talents who would have made it to test cricket irrespective of which team they played for( Some teams without or with only a few overseas players tend to struggle).

Another concern is that too many of our(SA) players are moving to England. This is due to the Pound and not due to quota systems as many people believe. I say this because players are leaving at club level( before provincial level), where there are no quotas, to earn pounds. This saddens me deeply.

So, should England reduce the number of overseas player or should they encourage more overseas players to come to the county league?

[Collyisamackem]

A very interesting and topical post there GF.

Firstly, let me tell you that the number of overseas players allowed for each club will be reduced to one from the 2008 season onwards, though there is no change to the number of Kolpak players who will be allowed to play, as this is under European Union legislation and will not change easily. So the situation will change slightly, for example Kent will no longer be able to have both Justin Kemp and Andrew Hall on their books at the same time, or Durham cannot have Mike Hussey/Jimmy Maher and Mick Lewis at the same time.

Having two high quality overseas players can be tremendous for the development of young players as older players pass on their expertise, like Mushtaq is doing with young spin bowlers at Sussex, or like Mike Hussey had begun to do with Durham's younger batsmen, and I welcome having two such players in each team. To answer a question of yours, I think the development of players such as Cook, Bell, Panesar et al was greatly aided by playing both with and against these guys in first class cricket.

I think the bigger problem lies in the Kolpak ruling. Sides are being filled with Kolpak players who cannot play for their home nation or for England, and thus reduce the number of spots available to young players who could stake a claim for an England berth. Added to this, whilst some are very good (Benkenstein, Ervine et al) others are not, and are less likely to be as skilled as the main overseas players. If it were possible somehow I would like to see the ruling changed or abolished, but sadly that is unlikely to happen. I would like to see clubs being sensible and not recruiting too many Kolpakers to allow for young English players to come through and develop without their way being blocked.

Another reason for the success of the young players who have recently made debuts for England is the strength of cricketing academies that have been set up, and the university centres of cricketing excellence at Loughborough (the base for the England academy), Durham, Oxford and Cambridge who can play first class matches, and at other universities. If the overseas/Kolpak situation was managed well enough to combine well with the academies/centres of excellence then that would be ideal.

As for audiences. Four-day crowds are said to be falling slightly, but they can be quite well-attended for example in school holidays, and one-day matches are well-attended as well as Twenty20 games being sold out frequently. it probably does help to have high profile overseas players playing for the club, just ask Hampshire, which adds to my arguments above that the problem lies in Kolpak players and not those on overseas contracts.

It would be good for me to see English players who are not in playing for England at that time going over to SA or other countries to play state/high level cricket during the winter, for us and yourselves. However, I think our county schedule is too packed to see that happen, as players need more of a break after a hectic county season.

[gibbs_fan]

Good post Colly

I think you brought up some valid points about the Kolpak players. I was unaware that Kolpak players are ineligible for England. Take Jonathan Trott for example. I followed his career from when he was a schoolboy( he is my age and played for a rival school). He made our provincial team at under-15, under-17, under-19, SA under -19. He was not offered a contract by Western Province and subsequently after about 3 years, he packed his bags. He became a Kolpak player and I always said that he would probably play for England one day( Having given up on SA). That is why I thought that Kolpak players could play for England. I think that the concept of Kolpak players is ridiculous. Trott, probably missing Cape Town , wanted to return and play for Western Province this coming season, after the county season, but he would have to play as an overseas player in SA because of the Kolpak rule. Dont you find this ridiculous, a South African playing in SA as an overseas player. As SA provincial teams can only have 1 overseas player, they did not find Trott experienced enough and opted to use that 1 spot for a more experienced player. Oh and Martin van Jaarsveld actually captained the Titans( provincial team in SA) as their overseas player. This simply does not make sense.

I like the idea of the English players playing overseas in their off season but would they consider playing in SA where they would probably earn peanuts, compared to what they earn in England.

[Collyisamackem]

I have to correct myself slightly there, I am assuming that Kolpak players cannot play for England, but I don't know if it is certain or not.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by gibbs_fan

I like the idea of the English players playing overseas in their off season but would they consider playing in SA where they would probably earn peanuts, compared to what they earn in England.

Cricinfo says Hoggard played for Freestate, not sure how long he went there for though.

I'm hoping the one overseas player rule they're bringing in will be good, hopefully make the teams try and sign a top quality one.

For example.. At the moment, if you've got an Australian passport, you're a dead cert to get a contract in England. Dan Cullen at Somerset

[adamberry]

Originally Posted by Pete

At the moment, if you've got an Australian passport, you're a dead cert to get a contract in England.

Unless it's Kent, where it's a South African passport. I think there are over half a dozen players at Kent that have SA passports as well as GB ones.

[greg]

I like the fact they are going back to only 1 overseas player per team as it is ridiculous having 2 as young English players won't get a look in.Personally i don't like the Kolpak ruling being here either as it is just a loophole to use more overseas players but we are stuck with that like the Bosman ruling in football.

It will encourage sides to develop youngsters if they can't just call on another international star and the money that teams save will help as well.Let me use Jason Gillespie as an example,he will be picking up a tidy wage for doing naff all this season except taking the place of a young English bowler who would have probably taken just as many wickets.

[cantplaycantalk]

I remember suggesting the solution of the ECB paying money to counties for playing English qualified players, as a payment for developing England qualified players years ago. The fact that it has both been introduced and is being ramped up is a very good thing and will reduce the number of Kolpaks playing 1st team at the least.

The best Kolpaks and the Best overseas players will still get contracts and it will raise the quality of the game in England, while I would hope that we will see the back of some of the Kolpak players who are effectively just steady County Pro's.

I think it would be good for the ECB to pay a bonus for under 23 year old England qualified players as well.

[darksideofthemoon]

Kolpak Ruling



A judgement in the European Court of Justice in May 2004 has meant that if a person is a national of a country which has an Association Agreement with the European Union (countries such as South Africa, Zimbabwe, some West Indian Islands etc) and that person is in possession of a valid UK work permit, he must be treated for the purposes of employment as if he was a citizen of an EU country.

In the case of cricket, this means that a cricketer from such a country who is in possession of a valid UK work permit is treated as if he were a British or other European citizen and can therefore qualify as a domestic player for Competitive County Cricket.

There is no residential requirement, but the player must not have played cricket at first-class level or above in the 12 months leading up to the season in question, or must give up playing as a domestic player in his home country.

This does not, of course, mean that the player is qualified for England. The main requirement for qualification for England is that the player must be a British or an Irish citizen and, if he was not born within England or Wales, he must complete a four-year residence period.

[cantplaycantalk]

A lot of the current Kolpaks have already qualified by residence or are in the process of doing so.

Fine by me in that case, same as for Kevin Peitersen.