Are Kolpak players hurting English cricket?

[zaremba]

On the subject at hand, I may be one of the few people who thinks Kolpaks are having little effect on English cricket. Not a ridiculous notion like the footballing equivalent, but i don't believe it likely that a player kept out of a poor county side by an average Kolpak (average ones being the most complained-about) would have went on to drastically improve the quality of the international side. Not many i've spoken to agree.

AWTA.

Even with the swarms of Kolpaks in the game, the number of opportunities for local players in First Class cricket in England is far greater than in any other country (Australia being the prime example), when you take into account (a) the number of domestic teams and (b) the number of matches that they play.

If you're a young Northants player and can't force your way into the team past Pik Van Der Kolpak and chums then you're unlikely ever to be Test material.

 

[Goughy]

If you're a young Northants player and can't force your way into the team past Pik Van Der Kolpak and chums then you're unlikely ever to be Test material.

What if they offer you 3 grand for a 2nd team contract and want you available for every game?

The English game loses many players as they are more expensive than a foreign (esp SA) equiv. Especially to develop. Thats why many guys get offered peanuts coming through the ranks.

 

[Uppercut]

What if they offer you 3 grand for a 2nd team contract and want you available for every game?

The English game loses many players as they are more expensive than a foreign (esp SA) equiv. Especially to develop. Thats why many guys get offered peanuts coming through the ranks.

Why are English players more expensive than foreign ones? Because South Africans are willing to work for less money. There's nothing to stop the English from accepting wages that Safricans deem perfectly adequate. The situation described above is, however, moving out of the area of cricket and into the realm of economics. I'm not inclined to speak on whether they're ruining the economic well-being of a few very mediocre budding cricketers, but as the quality of the English national side goes, Kolpak has very little effect IMO.

 

[Richard]

Why are English players more expensive than foreign ones? Because South Africans are willing to work for less money. There's nothing to stop the English from accepting wages that Safricans deem perfectly adequate.

Well, yeah there is. The trouble is, English cricket already has to compete with other things. A relatively affluent wage-packet is one of the few tools left at the county game's disposal to attract young players of calibre to cricket ahead of other things.

I'm not against high-ish wages for county cricketers; I'm against the ridiculous number of professionals on the books of counties. By my calculations, with the last matches of the season underway, 378 players have appeared in First-Class matches for county first-teams this year. Not every single one of these will be a full-time pro, but the vast majority will - and there'll be a handful of others who are full-time who haven't played at all this year. Included amongst these are copious numbers of players who will never make good county cricketers (these include some Kolpaks and EU-passporters), plus any number of youngsters who are certainly promising but far from good enough yet to be playing full seasons and performing well (which for mine should be the sole criteria for a pro contract).

If counties stopped employing mediocrities (and en-masse South Africans) they'd actually be able to pay even better wages to their pros - as well as spend far more on the enhancement of the club cricket under their jurisdiction. And this is the most important function of a county's money for mine. It sickens me to see money thrown at overseas-players and nothing professionals when it could instead be being spent on making amateurs (and youngsters) better and more readily equipped to make the step up.

 

[Uppercut]

If counties stopped employing mediocrities (and en-masse South Africans) they'd actually be able to pay even better wages to their pros - as well as spend far more on the enhancement of the club cricket under their jurisdiction. And this is the most important function of a county's money for mine. It sickens me to see money thrown at overseas-players and nothing professionals when it could instead be being spent on making amateurs (and youngsters) better and more readily equipped to make the step up.

Why do you feel any better about money being thrown at mediocre professionals when they're mediocre English professionals? I'd never argue that the county system is perfect, but surely if they're playing poor players ahead of good, promising ones, their respective nationality isn't an issue at all? Surely the issue is not that they're Kolpaks, but that they're not very good?

 

[Goughy]

Why are English players more expensive than foreign ones? Because South Africans are willing to work for less money. There's nothing to stop the English from accepting wages that Safricans deem perfectly adequate. The situation described above is, however, moving out of the area of cricket and into the realm of economics. I'm not inclined to speak on whether they're ruining the economic well-being of a few very mediocre budding cricketers, but as the quality of the English national side goes, Kolpak has very little effect IMO.

The cost of living is completely different. A South African can afford to accept less as their house is in SA and they spend half the year there.

 

[Richard]

Why do you feel any better about money being thrown at mediocre professionals when they're mediocre English professionals? I'd never argue that the county system is perfect, but surely if they're playing poor players ahead of good, promising ones, their respective nationality isn't an issue at all? Surely the issue is not that they're Kolpaks, but that they're not very good?

OK, maybe I didn't make it clear enough... I don't like money being thrown at poor British pros or at reasonable-quality overseas-players if this is en-masse (I don't particularly mind 1 per county if this 1 is top-quality). However I dislike it even more when it's being thrown at moderate overseas-players like Jacques du Toit, Greg Smith and Andrew Crook.

 

[Uppercut]

The cost of living is completely different. A South African can afford to accept less as their house is in SA and they spend half the year there.

English cricketers can live in SA too for half the year, if they so wish. That sounds like an unreasonable statement, but it's worth remembering that it's the sacrifice every Kolpak is having to make in order to play.

But yeah, i'm aware of the economic context, but i don't consider it a big enough consideration to be blamed even partially for a decline of quality in English cricket.

 

[Richard]

I don't think any decline has happened yet. The en-masse-overseas thing has only been a recent phenomena, and with any luck it's going to be nipped in the bud. It'd only have started to become a problem if it'd happened for decades.

 

[Uppercut]

OK, maybe I didn't make it clear enough... I don't like money being thrown at poor British pros or at reasonable-quality overseas-players if this is en-masse (I don't particularly mind 1 per county if this 1 is top-quality). However I dislike it even more when it's being thrown at moderate overseas-players like Jacques du Toit, Greg Smith and Andrew Crook.

Whether you dislike it or not, is it really doing any damage to the English national team? Surely extremely few, if any, of the players displaced by Kolpaks would have gone on to play a single game for England. The effect is minimal.

 

[Uppercut]

I don't think any decline has happened yet. The en-masse-overseas thing has only been a recent phenomena, and with any luck it's going to be nipped in the bud. It'd only have started to become a problem if it'd happened for decades.

Ye, was referring to a prospective decline. Disagree that there would be one, though.

 

[Richard]

Whether you dislike it or not, is it really doing any damage to the English national team? Surely extremely few, if any, of the players displaced by Kolpaks would have gone on to play a single game for England. The effect is minimal.

The point is not that players who'd have gone on to play for England have been displaced (I've always argued against this) but that money is being wasted which would be much better spent elsewhere.

Wasted by all of being spent on:
a) en-masse good-to-decent overseas pros;
b) poor British pros;
c) moderate overseas pros.

I dislike this because I think it is doing damage to the English national game.

 

[Uppercut]

The point is not that players who'd have gone on to play for England have been displaced (I've always argued against this) but that money is being wasted which would be much better spent elsewhere.

Wasted by all of being spent on:
a) en-masse good-to-decent overseas pros;
b) poor British pros;
c) moderate overseas pros.

I dislike this because I think it is doing damage to the English national game.

Money is being wasted on moderate overseas pros that would be better spent on poor English players? Because it's fair to say, anyone as good or better than the distinctly mediocre Kolpaks can find a place in a county side. It doesn't sound to me like Kolpak is what's doing the damage; counties spending money unwisely is the problem, a lot of Kolpaks is merely a symptom. No?

 

[fredfertang]

Too many counties is the problem but the solution to that, to me at least, is too unpleasant to contemplate

 

[Uppercut]

Too many counties is the problem but the solution to that, to me at least, is too unpleasant to contemplate

Could make some counties semi-pro, perhaps. The fact that a real cricket match lasts four days really works against it though...

 

[Richard]

Money is being wasted on moderate overseas pros that would be better spent on poor English players?

NO! I don't know how many times I'm going to have to say it. In fact... I don't need to. You say it yourself below.

It doesn't sound to me like Kolpak is what's doing the damage; counties spending money unwisely is the problem, a lot of Kolpaks is merely a symptom. No?

Yes, exactly.

However, the reinstatement of strict rulings regarding overseas-players who don't have British or EU passports of convenience is one way to improve the prospects of money being spent wisely. I'd be happier if it were done than if it weren't. It certainly isn't a magic bullet, don't anyone dare think I'm suggesting it is. It's one piece of a puzzle and no more.

 

[Richard]

Too many counties is the problem but the solution to that, to me at least, is too unpleasant to contemplate

If Northants and someone else must be relegated to Minor County status, then that in the end is what must happen. However I happen to think that given we've managed with 17 and 18 First-Class counties for a great many years now, it's unlikely that all that much is going to have changed.

Too many players and too many games is far more of a problem than too many First-Class counties, IMO.

 

[GIMH]

If Northants and someone else must be relegated to Minor County status, then that in the end is what must happen. However I happen to think that given we've managed with 17 and 18 First-Class counties for a great many years now, it's unlikely that all that much is going to have changed.

Too many players and too many games is far more of a problem than too many First-Class counties, IMO.

Remove the too many games problem and the too many players problem will probably go away

 

[Richard]

Well, it'll certainly help. But I'd not think you'd get the reduction I'd be hoping to see.

For mine, 13-14 full-time pros per county is enough - including 1 from overseas if the county can get one good enough. A few should be on "rookie" contracts (for promising youngsters who are playing regular second-team and occasional first-team games - and I suppose less promising ones too) like happens in Australia. And of course there'd need to be amateurs brought in from the local leagues (as very occasionally happens currently) for the odd game when big injury crises happened - this too happens in Australia from time to time. And these players would be so much better prepared for their occasional county game if the facilities at their clubs were of excellent quality because the county concerned had invested money in them instead of spending it on Kolpaks to play in front of empty stadia.

 

[Uppercut]

Problem is, those of us with real jobs might have difficulty giving them a miss from wednesday to saturday in order to go play cricket.