Top_Cat said:
Although agreeing with just about everything you said, I think the attitude of Aussie players being of a higher standard can also be traced back to how many overseas players fail to succeed here in Australia. You're right in that the number of Aussies who succeed in England is similar to those who don't but I've had a bit of a think and I can't think of the last overseas player who succeeded here in domestic cricket, certainly not being in the top 10 run scorers or wicket-takers. In fact, quite a few overseas cricketers play grade cricket and stay there. This can also be explained; generally state selectors, when faced with picking a talented overseas player vs a young talented local player will generally play the local lad. Australia's attitude to foreign players is generally pretty poor.
I would have thought that would have a great deal to do with the quality of overseas player you get. Your main catchment is going to be the English, as most other places have got their own domestic season going on, and the only ones who will bother to come over for the tiny amounts of money on offer are young pros looking to broaden their cricket education: the established pro with a mortgage to pay will want something more lucrative over the winter.
English county clubs, on the other hand, are able to offer substantial salaries and can therefore choose from the range of established f-c players. They don't hire aspiring young Australian players who are hoping to cement their place in their State side next season - those guys go to the English leagues and play as overseas pros in club cricket, ie nearer the equivalent level to grade cricket. I can't say I particularly enjoy seeing these decent county pros, as most of them turn out to be, because it takes some of the fun out of it not to wonder whether you're seeing a future England player, but needs must and all that.
15 years ago, Sheffield Shield cricket was certainly of a higher standard than anywhere else. But the Australian Test players don't play domestic cricket any more, just as the English ones hardly do, but while English cricket imports an array of foreign Test players to top up the quality, Australia only fills from below. And can only fill from below because all the worthwhile foreigners are otherwise engaged..
I can't see how it would benefit Australian cricket for State sides to hire jobbing English pros - with only six sides it really would restrict opportunities without the bums-on-seats benefit which hiring Warne, Murali or Shoaib Akhtar brings to have Martin Saggers and Ian Ward occupying places in Victoria's side.
And the other reason for the narrowing of the gap is that English county cricket has got more competitive. There was a fear, although some would call it a hope, at the time we brought in two-divisional cricket that it would concentrate all the good players at a few top clubs, and that we would end up with only Division One being worthwhile, which would lead to the extinction of the weaker clubs as the sponsors all deserted to cricket's de facto premiership. That hasn't happened, but the desire for winning the glory of promotion and avoiding the stigma of relegation has had the desired effect of making counties play properly all the way through until late August at least.
And one of the reasons it hasn't happened is that lowly clubs can do a great deal to even up the odds, as a rather unsuccessful Hampshire did a couple of years ago when they signed Warne. Which is turning out to be a fantastically successful coup.
I'm really pleased to see what Warne's doing at Hampshire: long-term commitment, working really hard with the whole squad, really being part of the club. That's the good old-fashioned way, like we had at Middlesex with Wayne Daniel and then Desi Haynes, which benefits everybody.
Cheers,
Mike
