• 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.

Eoin Morgan

superkingdave

Hall of Fame Member
On a separate issue, i think England's continual selection of the top Associate players is a cynical way to keep them down. I do not believe for one minute it is because the selectors think Morgan (or Joyce for that matter) is the best possible selection. as many have said, there are plenty of other county players who could fit the same position.

If I was an England supporter it would tick me off that my own country's development was being harmed simply to stop another nation getting stronger. not cricket at all and piss poor form imo.

With all due respect, i think that's rubbish. All 2 (Amjad Khan stopped playing for Denmark in 2000 iirc and did the qualification period) of the associate players that have been selected by England have been consistent with Englands other selection decisions. Morgan is clearly one of the best young batsmen in county cricket at the moment and Joyce had put together a very good case for selection at the time he was picked.

England are clearly keeping Ireland down, they haven't improved at all with the increase in Irish players playing on the county scene...
 

andruid

Cricketer Of The Year
ten Doeschate's nowhere near good enough to play for South Africa, but if he was, I reckon he would have by now.
If he ever were, however, as of the current state of things he could literally walk out of the Dutch XI and straught into the S. African one overnight. (like a footie transfer without the hefty transfer fees)
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Personally, I'd not have a problem with that, as I'm not in favour of the regulations that allow him to turn-out for Holland ITFP. Or Hemp for Bermuda; Nannes for Holland; etc. etc.

If you want to strengthen the associates by allowing players to be bred in Full Member countries then go and strengthen the "ODI" sides of associates, then you may as well just allow free-for-all with no restrictions. The idea that someone can become a national of one country despite having lived all or virtually all their life in another is, to me, something that makes the idea of "playing for your country" redundant.
 
Last edited:

andruid

Cricketer Of The Year
Personally, I'd not have a problem with that, as I'm not in favour of the regulations that allow him to turn-out for Holland ITFP. Or Hemp for Bermuda; Nannes for Holland; etc. etc.

If you want to strengthen the associates by allowing players to be bred in Full Member countries then go and strengthen the "ODI" sides of associates, then you may as well just allow free-for-all with no restrictions. The idea that someone can become a national of one country despite having lived all or virtually all their life in another is, to me, something that makes the idea of "playing for your country" redundant.
True which is why the qualifiactions need tweaking. Basically if someone has been selected atsenior level for one NT (irrespective of anything else) they should heve to completely renounce that team and fulfil the 4 year qualification to play for anywhere else.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Well TBH I'd just prefer that (with occasional exceptions) players had to qualify via residence for 10 years to play for any national cricket team. This would mean that you'd have to have lived in a country from a very young age in order to have a substantial international career for them.
 

andruid

Cricketer Of The Year
Well TBH I'd just prefer that (with occasional exceptions) players had to qualify via residence for 10 years to play for any national cricket team. This would mean that you'd have to have lived in a country from a very young age in order to have a substantial international career for them.
And that these rules apply for all National teams
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Oh, absolutely. It's more than a little unfair on those who happen to be very good at cricket but thus will never have the chance to play it (eg, if you're raised in Denmark or Yugoslavia) but it'd IMO be worth it to stop passport-of-convenience play and nation-hopping. As I say, either that or you just abandon all qualification and let anyone play for whoever they want to, to get the best distribution of talent you can manage.

BTW, if I was to put these rules into place I'd also put rules into place that England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and ROI played cricket for the same side.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
And that these rules apply for all National teams
This would just hamstring associates further tho; guys like Morgan & Joyce would just stop playing for Ireland if they thought they had a chance of test recognition and had to serve a qualification period when they weren't available for their home nation.
 

superkingdave

Hall of Fame Member
This would just hamstring associates further tho; guys like Morgan & Joyce would just stop playing for Ireland if they thought they had a chance of test recognition and had to serve a qualification period when they weren't available for their home nation.
Or if players decided to play for Ireland, they might struggle for county contracts as ECB funding is reduced the less England qualified players turn out so counties would have to pay more for Irish players and decide its not worth it for some.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Or if players decided to play for Ireland, they might struggle for county contracts as ECB funding is reduced the less England qualified players turn out so counties would have to pay more for Irish players and decide its not worth it for some.
Maybe, although the financial penalties don't seem to have put certain counties off the Kolpaks overly tho.
 

superkingdave

Hall of Fame Member
Maybe, although the financial penalties don't seem to have put certain counties off the Kolpaks overly tho.
As the payments get higher, and they are due to get higher again next year, it will become a factor imo. Even Leicestershire have 'only' been playing 3 non england qualified players in their side this season. I'm not sure if they are raising the number required for maximum incentive payments from 9 to 10 as well as raising the amount, but they should.

Given the ECB handouts are a massive part of county income, if the ECB increase the incentive portion significantly it could have a large effect.
 
Last edited:

BoyBrumby

Englishman
As the payments get higher, and they are due to get higher again next year, it will become a factor imo. Even Leicestershire have 'only' been playing 3 non england qualified players in their side this season. I'm not sure if they are raising the number required for maximum incentive payments from 9 to 10 as well as raising the amount, but they should.
Fair play. Must admit I hadn't paid that much attention to the Foxes this year yet.

Least the ECB is trying to do something. Baby steps still, but something.
 

andruid

Cricketer Of The Year
This would just hamstring associates further tho; guys like Morgan & Joyce would just stop playing for Ireland if they thought they had a chance of test recognition and had to serve a qualification period when they weren't available for their home nation.
Or if players decided to play for Ireland, they might struggle for county contracts as ECB funding is reduced the less England qualified players turn out so counties would have to pay more for Irish players and decide its not worth it for some.
IIIRC correctly, a lot of these sorts got into County cricket on the back of their performances for Ireland, so that is a bit of a moot point.
 

superkingdave

Hall of Fame Member
IIIRC correctly, a lot of these sorts got into County cricket on the back of their performances for Ireland, so that is a bit of a moot point.
I don't think its a moot point, they may have got into county cricket on the back of Ireland performances but none of them walzed into county sides straight away. Eg Rankin played two seasons of second xi cricket before making his championship debut, Porterfield played 4 seasons of second XI cricket, even Ed Joyce played a year of second xi championship before making his first class debut for middlesex.

So they obviously weren't picked up in the expectation they would go straight into the first XI and perform. Given this i think its not unreasonable to suggest that counties would be less inclined to give the Irish players the initial chances they have if they knew that, providing they made the grade, they would be penalised financially for playing them in the first team. Obviously there would probably be an exception, someone who is prodigously talented.
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Personally, Eoin Morgan should be allowed to play for both. Reckon that, to strengthen the game, Associates should be allowed to play Test matches for their adopted country, and ODI's and Twenty20 for their original country.
 

andruid

Cricketer Of The Year
Personally, Eoin Morgan should be allowed to play for both. Reckon that, to strengthen the game, Associates should be allowed to play Test matches for their adopted country, and ODI's and Twenty20 for their original country.
That would pretty much reduce Associates into spare provionves/counties of the Test nations as opposed to test teams in the making.

I want a system where the best associates are given a genuine shot at gaining test status onb the field rather than in the boardroom.
 

Chemosit

First Class Debutant
With Zim playing in the IC cup (if that all goes ahead) there is the perfect opportunity for the ICC to give players the opportunity of earning Test status through qualification. Top IC nation progresses to Test cricket - removes need for worrying about player defection plus gives a genuine chance for any team to aspire to Tests.

As to nations benefiting when their top players play county cricket - I'm not convinced. Unless they also play in their own nation's domestic comps, they do little for improving the standard of the game in their country so wrt the argument that the top players would cease playing for their country as they try to qualify for a Test nation (read England), perhaps this would actually benefit the Associates as they could then invest money in other players who are more likely to stay.
 

Top