• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Nikhil Nichani - The Players' Statement

Neil Pickup

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
Having considered the Nikhil Nichani situation at length, we the undersigned believe that the proposed solution goes against all that the CWXI is meant to stand for.

It's supposed to be "CricketWeb against the World", not a fantasy where one can choose who to represent.

As such, we have come to a joint decision that we - and the sides that we captain - will boycott all matches involving Nichani playing for a non-CricketWeb side.

Signed

Marc Robbins - CW Red Captain
Richard Hingston - CW Blue Captain
Andrew Garven - CW Green Captain
Brendon Goff - CW XI Captain
Håkon Mørk - CW Players Association Representative
Andre Maddocks - Non-Playing Representative
Neil Pickup
Peter Young
Thomas Halsey
David Watt (Aust_Hitman)
TDCC
Kyle Wright
Jamee Gray
Ash Chaulk
Jason Toogood
 
Last edited:
Mr Mxyzptlk

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
So be it, however there is no reasoning that would not allow him to play for his home country. The question is whether he is good enough to do so. There is no law by the ICC to my knowledge nor is there any in the CW XI. Basically his contract has been terminated to be renewed at the end of his ban, but if he wishes not to renew that contract, that's his decision.

However, as I said, so be it. I respect your decision but cricket must continue as usual.
 
Andre

Andre

International Regular
Surely common sense dictates that if he doesn't play for the CWXI, he has to be an actual Indian 'A' player to play for India 'A'.

Granted it's a sim and all, but as you've stated you don't pick any old player for the 'A' sides, you pick the ones close to the national squad - and that is certainly not the player in question.

It would make a farce, would it not?
 
PY

PY

International Coach
Surely for all intents and purposes he is a CricketWeb national (if you think of it as real life) ?

In that case, I want to play for England. :glare:
 
Neil Pickup

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
Mr Mxyzptlk said:
There is no law by the ICC to my knowledge
Click to expand...
Time for a Knowledge Upgrade then, methinks :)

Definitions
1. “Immediately preceding years” means the years immediately preceding the date by which applications are due to be submitted to the ICC by Members concerning their nominations for a particular tournament or competition, regardless of whether those years predate the Effective Date.

2. “Member” means a Full, Associate or Affiliate Member and “Member Country” shall be construed accordingly. In the simulated world of CWXI; CricketWeb is a full member - or else we would not have played Tests.

3. “Representative Cricket” means any cricket match or matches in which a team representing a Member Country at Under 19 level or above takes part and which takes place under the auspices of ICC. Representing the full side against Jamaica, and in the Dev League.

Qualification Criteria
1. A cricketer is qualified to play Representative Cricket for a Member Country of which he is a national [or, in cases of non-nationals, in which he was born] provided that:
(i) He has not played Representative Cricket for any other Member Country during the 4 immediately preceding years

Transfer of “Playing Nationality”
1. Cricketers qualified to play for a Member Country can continue to represent that country without negating their eligibility or interrupting their qualification period for another Member Country up until the stage that the cricketer has played for the first Member Country at Under 19 level or above.

There are a lot of other provisos - mostly relating to Affiliate and Associate members.

Comment
In summary, not only is the action a violation of ICC rules, but it goes against the whole principle of the CricketWeb XI.

This would set a precedent - there is nothing to stop me, Pete or Marc declaring that we want to play for England (and let's face it, with their Namibian-standard ODI performances, we'd be straight in the side).

We do not feel that there is any reason for there to be one set of rules for Nichani and one set of rules for another member.

Our position has strong support amongst the players - and the list of signatories is growing by the hour. We urge other players who back us to join the boycott.
 
marc71178

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Mr Mxyzptlk said:
So be it, however there is no reasoning that would not allow him to play for his home country. The question is whether he is good enough to do so. There is no law by the ICC to my knowledge nor is there any in the CW XI. Basically his contract has been terminated to be renewed at the end of his ban, but if he wishes not to renew that contract, that's his decision.
Click to expand...

If he's banned then he's banned from cricket.

Therefore how is his selection anything but going 100% against the ban?

In fact this isn't any sort of punishment whatsoever.
 
Slats4ever

Slats4ever

International Vice-Captain
I am completely against any boycott action and against the idea that my team captain can withdraw the whole team from playing India A. It's the individuals decision.

There are many youngsters out there who'd be very excited about getting a run and we shuld just send the guys over there who want to play. If you wanna boycott then fine but if you wanna be able to play then so be it. It's the perfect oppurtunity for some of the guys to get a run.

Our job as professional cricketers is to play cricket. We are entertainers, and the people of India, and our spectators anywhere in this world want to see us play cricket. Therefore I see it as my job to go play cricket in front of them.

In no way shape or form do I agree with Nikhil's actions, they are unpatriotic, selfish and not in the spirit of the game. However it is up to the board to solve this problem correctly not us players.
 
Last edited:
marc71178

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
The captaincy was conferred upon our heads for a reason, and this sort of decision comes into our remit.

It is clear from discussions with other members of the teams that by far the majority support the boycott - so as such there would be no team to compete.

I appreciate your honesty on this matter though.
 
Slats4ever

Slats4ever

International Vice-Captain
I will take my kit and go over there by myself if I have to when we're scheduled to play them and take them on single handedly. All those poor little Indians, Cricket is their life. We can't let one selfish player hinder their enjoyment guys. It's a board issue not ours. can't we talk about other ways of solving it.
 
Neil Pickup

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
Slats4ever said:
I will take my kit and go over there by myself if I have to when we're scheduled to play them and take them on single handedly. All those poor little Indians, Cricket is their life. We can't let one selfish player hinder their enjoyment guys. It's a board issue not ours. can't we talk about other ways of solving it.
Click to expand...
I'll be interested in hearing another way.
 
Slats4ever

Slats4ever

International Vice-Captain
Throw stones at his house.

I guess maybe less strong boycotting powers. Whilst I understand Marc and other captains strong views on this, they can't take the whole team away.
I understand by saying that, that I'm sort've going against the whole notion of it's a team thing, but I strongly urge Marc to reconsider and let members of his team who want to play, play.
 
Jamee999

Jamee999

Hall of Fame Member
I as a player who before this whole situation would have relished the fact to play with Nikhil as I did and still do think he is a top player however I refuse to play with anyone who's allegiences are not with his team.

I propose a 1 (real) year ban for Nichani and If he re-offends a life ban from the CWXI or any of it's sub-teams.

Furthermore he should not be allowed to play for India "A" unless he plays for them in real life.

I will agree to any boycott nvolving Nikhil who I used to have respect for.

Jamee999 preparing for my next Dev League match,where ever it may be.
 
Mr Mxyzptlk

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Neil Pickup said:
Time for a Knowledge Upgrade then, methinks :)

Definitions
1. “Immediately preceding years” means the years immediately preceding the date by which applications are due to be submitted to the ICC by Members concerning their nominations for a particular tournament or competition, regardless of whether those years predate the Effective Date.

2. “Member” means a Full, Associate or Affiliate Member and “Member Country” shall be construed accordingly. In the simulated world of CWXI; CricketWeb is a full member - or else we would not have played Tests.

3. “Representative Cricket” means any cricket match or matches in which a team representing a Member Country at Under 19 level or above takes part and which takes place under the auspices of ICC. Representing the full side against Jamaica, and in the Dev League.

Qualification Criteria
1. A cricketer is qualified to play Representative Cricket for a Member Country of which he is a national [or, in cases of non-nationals, in which he was born] provided that:
(i) He has not played Representative Cricket for any other Member Country during the 4 immediately preceding years

Transfer of “Playing Nationality”
1. Cricketers qualified to play for a Member Country can continue to represent that country without negating their eligibility or interrupting their qualification period for another Member Country up until the stage that the cricketer has played for the first Member Country at Under 19 level or above.

There are a lot of other provisos - mostly relating to Affiliate and Associate members.

Comment
In summary, not only is the action a violation of ICC rules, but it goes against the whole principle of the CricketWeb XI.

This would set a precedent - there is nothing to stop me, Pete or Marc declaring that we want to play for England (and let's face it, with their Namibian-standard ODI performances, we'd be straight in the side).

We do not feel that there is any reason for there to be one set of rules for Nichani and one set of rules for another member.

Our position has strong support amongst the players - and the list of signatories is growing by the hour. We urge other players who back us to join the boycott.
Click to expand...
Quite simply put, the Cricket Web XI is a unique organization. We are not Australia, England or even the diverse West Indies. The individual countries of which we comprise largely play international cricket. First we are nationals, then we are Cricket Web members. As such, all players to represent the CW Red, Blue and Green teams are contracted.

He is contracted to the CW Blue in the same way that Shane Warne is contracted to Lancashire and Reon King to Durham. That said, I feel it necessary that I suspend him from playing action for India 'A' as well until all is said and done in this matter, and until Reuben has a say.
 
age_master

age_master

Hall of Fame Member
Mr Mxyzptlk said:
He is contracted to the CW Blue in the same way that Shane Warne is contracted to Lancashire and Reon King to Durham. That said, I feel it necessary that I suspend him from playing action for India 'A' as well until all is said and done in this matter, and until Reuben has a say.
Click to expand...

it would be more like Shane Warne quitting Australian cricket and starting immediatley and playing for England A
 
lord_of_darkness

lord_of_darkness

Cricket Web XI Moderator
Quite simply put, the Cricket Web XI is a unique organization. We are not Australia, England or even the diverse West Indies. The individual countries of which we comprise largely play international cricket. First we are nationals, then we are Cricket Web members. As such, all players to represent the CW Red, Blue and Green teams are contracted.

He is contracted to the CW Blue in the same way that Shane Warne is contracted to Lancashire and Reon King to Durham. That said, I feel it necessary that I suspend him from playing action for India 'A' as well until all is said and done in this matter, and until Reuben has a say.
Click to expand...
Liam is exactly right there about the CWXI being an individual organization and being different from the rest.. we have our own guidelines and rules that work well with the ICC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top