HeathDavisSpeed
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Has the restriction on playing for your country been tested in EU law? Seems bizarre that such a restraint of trade would be allowable.
-
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.
Brendon Taylor first world cup Kolpak to sign for County cricket,Who's next.
- Thread starter brockley
- Start date
morgieb
Request Your Custom Title Now!
If they qualify for England (which Taylor will need to wait another 7 years to do) then I think so.
Spark
Global Moderator
Still, it's something that Giles Clarke would do. What a **** he is.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Zimbabweans playing county cricket instead of for Zimbabwe doesn't really "shrink" cricket though. It makes international matches less competitive, sure, but that's not the same thing. The fact that the pathways are still strong enough to give Zimbabweans cricketing career options overseas is good for the spread of the game even if it's not good for the health of international competitions.
Pratters
Cricket, Lovely Cricket
I don't agree at all man. When young kids see Zimbabwe play, and get beaten far more, as their top players are not playing the game, that doesn't help the game at all. Imagine if Rubel Hossain was playing for KKR because of a rule like Kolpak and not for Bangladesh. Bangladesh wouldn't have won v England, possibly, and so many youngsters would not have been inspired to take on the game, which I am sure they have been with that victory.
I somewhat agree with Pratters here. If you're a young Zimbabwean kid and you see your team getting destroyed every game and your best players ****ing off to play weird non-TV cricket in a different country, then it's probably not conducive to growing support for the game.
It may not reduce the 'spread' of the game per se, but it may very well reduce participation rates in Zimbabwe.
It may not reduce the 'spread' of the game per se, but it may very well reduce participation rates in Zimbabwe.
Daemon
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Talented kids in Zimbabwe may be tempted to train hard in order to earn those CC contracts though. They're probably aware of where the players like Taylor are going and how much their lives will improve because of it, they're not dumb and think it's just 'weird non-TV cricket'.
Subjective though, and we're probably not in the best position to know what the impact will be.
Subjective though, and we're probably not in the best position to know what the impact will be.
Spikey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
just a small nit pick and hardly related to the post in question but it was ECB lobbying that led to the "must have played recent international cricket" criteria being introduced by the government in relation to kolpak players/overseas players
When I was 5 or 6 and starting to become passionate about the game, if I'd watched Australia getting smashed game after game and Glenn McGrath going "lol nope, going to stick with Worcestershire thanks very much" or Steve Waugh pissing off overseas, I don't think I'd have cared about cricket nearly as much as I do now.
When kids get older, then sure, they're likely to go "hey, this could be a way out of Zimbabwe". But when you're first seeing the game, and when you're in that hero-worship stage, I can think of nothing worse than seeing your hero leave in their best years to play County Cricket.
When kids get older, then sure, they're likely to go "hey, this could be a way out of Zimbabwe". But when you're first seeing the game, and when you're in that hero-worship stage, I can think of nothing worse than seeing your hero leave in their best years to play County Cricket.
That is kids already in cricket who are able to come information on County opportunities. I doubt it would be conducive to attract kids into cricket itself. But having good players playing for the national team help do that not them going off to overseas and losing domestic access.
Edit: Dan!
Last edited:
Furball
Evil Scotsman
The whole point of Kolpak is that you can play your trade in Europe as a "local" as a result of agreements between your country and the EU; you can't argue you're playing as a local whilst still representing Zimbabwe or South Africa.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Immenso
International Vice-Captain
No, it's is the ECBs self serving distortion of the Kolpak rule to their own advantage.
Under the Kolpak rule a Zimbabwean like Taylor should be treated no differently to EU citizens like an Irishman or Dutchman like Joyce or Ten Doeschate. But they are treated differently.
But the ECB enforce an extra restriction on kolpaks, this is their own choice, it is detrimental to world cricket, and it is now helped along with extra slices of ICC money.
The Kolpak ruling is a European Court of Justice ruling handed down on 8 May 2003 in favour of Maroš Kolpak, a Slovak handball player. It declared that citizens of countries which have signed European Union Association Agreements have the same right to freedom of work and movement within the EU as EU citizens. Thus any restrictions placed on their right to work (such as quotas setting maximum numbers of such foreign players in sports teams) are deemed illegal under EU law.
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
This does seem to be the sticking point. There may well have been a good reason for it in the past but it seems very harsh now.