***Official*** South Africa in England

[Prince EWS]

I reckon a few in that D list would help strengthen domestic cricket at least. The likes of Willoughby and Pothas are getting on and have no chance of pushing for national selection, but surely they'd provide better competition and hence a more significant preparation for younger players in First Class cricket.

 

[PhoenixFire]

From what I've seen of du Plessis, both live and on TV, I'd probably grade in the B catergory, looks like one of the better batsmen going round CC ATM.

 

[Goughy]

From what I've seen of du Plessis, both live and on TV, I'd probably grade in the B catergory, looks like one of the better batsmen going round CC ATM.

TBF, I dont think he is even the best player of his type at Northerns let alone Titans or South Africa.

He has a very similar record to Maurice Aronstam as a batsman and as a legspiner. However, Aronstam has a Franchise 200 and a first class fifer.

 

[PhoenixFire]

I can't comment on how good he has done in SA Domestic as I have never seen him play there. But from what I have seen him play for Lancs, he has looked class, he's quite young, is he not.

 

[Richard]

Using this list from 8 months ago.

A
Ryan McLaren
Jacques Rudolph
Jonathan Trott
B
Craig Kieswetter
Andrew Hall
Justin Kemp
C
Friedel de Wet
Nicky Boje
Martin van Jaarsveld
Dale Benkenstein
Greg Smith
Boeta Dippenaar
HD Ackerman
Francois du Plessis
D
Chad Keegan
Gareth Berg
Riki Wessels
Dawid Malan
Nick Compton
Garnett Kruger
Claude Henderson
Neil Dexter
Nic Pothas
Kevin Latouf
Michael Lumb
Grant Hodnett
Garry Park
Deon Kruis
Stephen Moore
Tim Groenewald
Neil Carter
Ant Botha
Jade Dernbach
Charl Willoughby

So for all the names, if I was SA cricket I would only focus on 6 names.
Ryan McLaren, Jacques Rudolph, Jonathan Trott, Craig Kieswetter, Andrew Hall and Justin Kemp

Given Trott has played T20Is for Eng then I doubt he can play for SA anymore so that takes the number to entice down to 5.

Out of the lot you've put in D I'd put Willoughby, Botha, Henderson, Kruger, Dexter, Malan and maybe Wessels in C and possibly in some cases higher.

And aren't some of those listed no longer SA-qualified? Like Pothas and Trott.

Were the likes of Dernbach, Berg, Compton, Lumb and Moore ever SA-qualified? Or are they just like Strauss - SAfrican by birth and possibly parentage but British by upbringing?

And you can exclude de Wet and Keegan from the list, as neither have actually played this season and I don't think Keegan intends to play as a pro again.

 

[zaremba]

Out of the lot you've put in D I'd put Willoughby, Botha, Henderson, Kruger, Dexter, Malan and maybe Wessels in C and possibly in some cases higher.

And aren't some of those listed no longer SA-qualified? Like Pothas and Trott.

Were the likes of Dernbach, Berg, Compton, Lumb and Moore ever SA-qualified? Or are they just like Strauss - SAfrican by birth and possibly parentage but British by upbringing?

And you can exclude de Wet and Keegan from the list, as neither have actually played this season and I don't think Keegan intends to play as a pro again.

Not sure about the precise rules but I imagine that if you're born in SA you're qualified to play for them. As I understand it, that's the rule in England (as the cases of Pattinson, Symonds and McCague showed).

 

[Goughy]

Not sure about the precise rules but I imagine that if you're born in SA you're qualified to play for them. As I understand it, that's the rule in England (as the cases of Pattinson, Symonds and McCague showed).

Yeah, being born in SA makes you qualified for SA. Living elsewhere may make you available for them as well.

They may be available for England but they are still qualified for SA. They just have more options than other players.

Still grinds my cricketing gears that my boys are not qualified for England but are for SA.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Not sure about the precise rules but I imagine that if you're born in SA you're qualified to play for them. As I understand it, that's the rule in England (as the cases of Pattinson, Symonds and McCague showed).

Yeah, that's the ICC's criteria too. Linky.

A. Core Nationality Criteria

A1. A national of the country (as defined by the country); or

A2. Born in the country; or

A3. Resident in the country for at least 183 days in each of the immediately preceding seven years; or

A4. Resident in the country for at least 183 days in each of the immediately preceding four years (some restrictions for Associates and Affliates detailed below).

B. Restrictions

B1. The player must not have represented another ICC member at Under 19 level or above - in an ICC sanctioned match (e.g. in a test match, ODI, ICC Global or Regional event) - in the immediately preceding four years (at Under 19 level or above).

 

[GIMH]

So Trott is no longer qualified but everyone else is, then

 

[Richard]

Yeah, being born in SA makes you qualified for SA. Living elsewhere may make you available for them as well.

They may be available for England but they are still qualified for SA. They just have more options than other players.

Still grinds my cricketing gears that my boys are not qualified for England but are for SA.

It truly is stupid, for mine, that a player can at one point be available for two countries, all they have to have done is not to have represented another team in the last 4 years. Absolutely and utterly ludicrous.

 

[Goughy]

It truly is stupid, for mine, that a player can at one point be available for two countries.

Why? People can be dual nationals so its fair they can pick either country.

 

[Uppercut]

As in football, noone should be allowed to represent another country if they have already represented another at U19 level or above.


Would help sort out Irish cricket too

 

[Manee]

I believe he means the principle rather than the technicality.

 

[zaremba]

Why? People can be dual nationals so its fair they can pick either country.

Yip.

 

[GIMH]

As in football, noone should be allowed to represent another country if they have already represented another at U19 level or above.


Would help sort out Irish cricket too

Agree with this, I think, though I think I would just say at full-international level, ie T20, ODI or Test. Not too fussed if they've played U19,

Mind you, we have a separate thread for this now might elaborate further in there.

 

[Uppercut]

Agree with this, I think, though I think I would just say at full-international level, ie T20, ODI or Test. Not too fussed if they've played U19,

Mind you, we have a separate thread for this now might elaborate further in there.

Indeed.

On a different note, how many tours is it now in which England have won either the tests or the ODIs but not both?

 

[GIMH]

Er let's see

South Africa, won ODIs, lost Tests
NZ, won Tests, lost ODIs (X2)
Sri Lanka, won ODIs, lost Tests
India, lost Tests, won ODIs
West Indies, won Tests, lost ODIs
Australia, won ODIs, lost Tests
Pakistan, won Tests, drew ODIs
Sri Lanka, drew Tests, lost ODIs - so that would be the last time we failed to win one. Before that we drew the Tests in India and got hammered in the ODIs, but Pakistan were the last team to do the double, if you will, in November/December 05 when they beat us 2-0 in the Tests and 3-2 in the ODIs. Don't think we've lost both at home since 2001

 

[Richard]

Given that we didn't lose a home Test series between 2002 and the first half of 2007, you'd be right.

 

[TT Boy]

Due to the ICL there isn't many who can offer that much to South Africa - even Ryan McLaren would surely only be a ODI player. It be interesting to see if CSA can pull something off, apparently they have some tri-series going on in the next week or so and all the seniors plays don't want anything to do with it whilst the A boys are busy with the Sri Lankans and aside from a couple they are hopelessly not good enough for the international arena.

The IPL is something which could entice the likes of McLaren into the fold, one of the reasons Andre Nel stayed was that an IPL contract was sorted out for him by CSA.

http://www.supersport.co.za/cricket/article.aspx?headline=McLaren to play for Proteas?&id=268156

 

[TT Boy]

As in football, noone should be allowed to represent another country if they have already represented another at U19 level or above.

Indeed at the age of 19 I think your old enough to make a decision on whom you want to represent and you should be made to live with that.