*Official* England in South Africa

[Goughy]

1 Subject to the overriding discretion of the ECB, acting with the consent of the International Cricket Council, a Cricketer will only be qualified to play for England in a Test Match or in a One Day International Match if:

(a) he is either a British citizen or an Irish citizen; and either
(i) he was born within England and Wales;
(ii) he has been resident in England and Wales for the immediately preceding four consecutive years;

and

(b) he has not during the immediately preceding four consecutive years either
(i) played cricket for any Full Member Country except England at under 17 level or above,
(ii) played First Class Cricket in any Full Member Country outside England and Wales, except as an overseas cricketer under local rules similar to Regulation 3 above or in any other circumtances approved by the ECB

and

(c) he makes, whenever requested by the ECB, a declaration in the form set out in the Annex to this
Regulation;

and

(d) he is also qualified for England pursuant to theprovisions laid down from time to time by ICC

Call me goofy but a while ago I contacted the government about this and asked about discrimination legislation against British citizens.

IIRC, the question I asked was if there was legislation to prevent discrimination against British citizens based on their place of birth. (ie can an Aus born Brit be discriminated against on the basis of being born in Aus or does legislation give them the exact same protections and rights as a British born Brit)

This is their reply. Make of it what you will

"The Equality Bill replicates the Race Relation Act 1976. Part 6 of the Act states that you cannot discriminate against another on the basis of that person's nationality or place of birth or the length of time for which he has been resident in a particular area or place, if the act is done:

(a)in selecting one or more persons to represent a country, place or area, or any related association, in any sport or game; or
(b) in pursuance of the rules of any competition so far as they relate to eligibility to compete in any sport or game.

Clause 188 of the Equality Bill allows the existing selection arrangements of national sports teams, regional and local clubs or related associations to continue. It also protects "closed" competitions where participation is limited to people who meet a requirement relating to nationality, place of birth or residence."

So the way I read it is that it is illegal to discriminate against a British citizen born elsewhere unless the selection rules pre-date the legislation. I find that pretty interesting.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

You could play rugby league for England tomorrow tho.

Presumably for France & New Zealand too.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Haha, I don't think I'd even need a passport for that; just having the English mother to begin with makes me eligible there I think.

Yeah, in fact an English grandparent would suffice. Although even league draws the line at great-grandparents, as NZ discovered to their cost with Fien.

Presumably for France & New Zealand too.

Ha, right enough. It's probably fair to say league has some of the most inclusive eligibility rules in any international sport. Jarryd Hayne has gone from an Australian test player to representing Fiji in the world cup and back to the Kangaroos in a little over two years.

Make it up as they go, tbh.

 

[wpdavid]

You are right by saying that it was not a scandal because of the racial policies at the time in SA but it is becoming a scandal because the world is ignoring the same thing happening right now.

Er, no it isn't the same thing. You've peddled that li(n)e a couple of times before, and if you really want to discuss how the current situation is the equivalent of 1948-1990 then I suggest you open a separate thread. Or read some books on the subject. But please spare us the re-writing of history, especially in what's supposed to be a cricket thread.

If it's any consolation, you're not the only one who's sore about the daw.

Smith questions England celebrations | Cricket News | South Africa v England 2009/10 | Cricinfo.com

EDIT
Strewth - just read today's posts for the first time. Trying to think of something polite to say about some of them & failing badly. Night all.

 

[Goughy]

Er, no it isn't the same thing. You've peddled that li(n)e a couple of times before, and if you really want to discuss how the current situation is the equivalent of 1948-1990 then I suggest you open a separate thread. Or read some books on the subject. But please spare us the re-writing of history, especially in what's supposed to be a cricket thread.

If it's any consolation, you're not the only one who's sore about the daw.

Smith questions England celebrations | Cricket News | South Africa v England 2009/10 | Cricinfo.com

It would actually be an interesting thread

 

[Burgey]

WTF happened in here this past 24 or so hours?

 

[GIMH]

It went something like this

 

[Pothas]

WTF happened in here this past 24 or so hours?

jboss happened.

 

[Briony]

Mind you Kieswtters record looks as good as Kuhns and average the same. Don't think he would make SA team anyway given that Kuhn can't either.

Kuhn played a T20 for SA did he not? And anyway he can't make the team because Boucher (a white) keeper is the incumbent. BTW the SA selectors asked Kieswetter if he wanted to return to have a chance of qualifying to be a Protea and he refused, saying he preferred to represent England. And for that matter Trott is on record as saying he prefers to live in Birmingham than Cape Town, so some leave for lifestyle reasons.

Many Saffers prefer living outside of SA - there's nothing wrong with that.

 

[wpdavid]

(re. England) Yeah, their bowling attack can be properly ****ing lethal at times too though. The tactic seems to be scrapping your way to a half-decent total, usually with contributions down the order, then hoping your attack has one of its unplayable days.

Yeah, that probably sums it up. Like Social and/or TEC said, there seems to be a bit more spirit about the side, even if I'm not sure how much that would help if we were facing anyone really good. Like some others, I'm not convinced about Prior at number 6, but we'll probably have to go there. If Wright does come in for Bell, Swann may as well bat above Broad judging by the last 6 months or so. I suppose the fact that our lower order is relatively strong is just about compensating for our top 6 being relatively weak. But I don't see our luck holding for the rest of this series unless a number of playes are able to seriously raise their game..

 

[Briony]

Both teams struggle a bit in the opening batting department.

 

[wpdavid]

Both teams struggle a bit in the opening batting department.

England more so, I'd have thought. And SA's middle order is significantly stronger. If their attack was as good as in 1999/2000 or 1995/96. they'd whitewash us without breaking into a sweat.

 

[Woodster]

England more so, I'd have thought. And SA's middle order is significantly stronger. If their attack as as good as in 1999/2000 or 1995/96. they'd whitewash us without breaking into a sweat.

Yes SA's top 6 is pretty impressive, inclusing the openers Smith and Prince. Those stubborn two at the top followed by such an exciting middle order is a really tough ask for England to get through fairly cheaply.

On England's openers, Cook has struggled in Tests for a while by his own standards. He is clearly in the process of making some technical adjustments and will hopefully come through the other side and get back to scoring big Test runs, the question is will England stick with him while he adjusts to his modifications or will they take him out of the spotlight to harness his new set-up.

I believe Cook will get back to scoring runs for England, it is just which way the England management go about getting him back there.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Cook's form is actually worryingly bad, with Bell to focus my disgruntlement on it'd slipped under the radar a bit. However, since the start of the Ashes he's managed one 50 in 12 innings @ under 23. statsguru.

 

[Pothas]

Cook's form is actually worryingly bad, with Bell to focus my disgruntlement on it'd slipped under the radar a bit. However, since the start of the Ashes he's managed one 50 in 12 innings @ under 23. statsguru.

Yeah Bell has masked another very poor test from Cook and it is certainly a worry, should be given the rest of the series at least though, have decided that he is going to make runs in the next match though.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah, that probably sums it up. Like Social and/or TEC said, there seems to be a bit more spirit about the side, even if I'm not sure how much that would help if we were facing anyone really good. Like some others, I'm not convinced about Prior at number 6, but we'll probably have to go there. If Wright does come in for Bell, Swann may as well bat above Broad judging by the last 6 months or so. I suppose the fact that our lower order is relatively strong is just about compensating for our top 6 being relatively weak. But I don't see our luck holding for the rest of this series unless a number of playes are able to seriously raise their game..

Judging by their entire careers tbh. Where did the idea that Broad is a better batsman than Swann even come from? His Dad? There's literally NOTHING that has EVER happened to suggest that. Swanny has four FC centuries.

It's a selectorial absolute joke that seems to have been widely missed.

 

[Jarquis]

Judging by their entire careers tbh. Where did the idea that Broad is a better batsman than Swann even come from? His Dad? There's literally NOTHING that has EVER happened to suggest that. Swanny has four FC centuries.

Yeah, when they're at Notts Swanneh bats above him. Just part of England's genius plan to turn Broad into Flintoff.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Judging by their entire careers tbh. Where did the idea that Broad is a better batsman than Swann even come from? His Dad? There's literally NOTHING that has EVER happened to suggest that. Swanny has four FC centuries.

It's a selectorial absolute joke that seems to have been widely missed.

I think it's an elaborate ruse to make the opposing bowlers let their guards down.

"If this guy's at seven/eight, the rest can't be up to much"
"Oh, he's out."
"Wait, he's having argument with the umpire. Just going for a piss"
...
"He gone yet?"
"Yeah, just about."
"So the next guy, who's that? Must be crap."
...
"Wait, what the hell just happened?"

 

[Stapel]

Judging by their entire careers tbh. Where did the idea that Broad is a better batsman than Swann even come from? His Dad? There's literally NOTHING that has EVER happened to suggest that. Swanny has four FC centuries.

It's a selectorial absolute joke that seems to have been widely missed.

Simple First class & Test figures show Swann is a slightly better batsman. However, it is my impression that Swann is more of a slogger and has a higher strike rate, whereas Broad can actually adapt his game to the situation a bit more. It's not going to make a hell of a lot of a difference to swap the two imho.

Didn't the two of them put up a nice partnership in last summer's lost Ashes test at Leeds?

 

[wpdavid]

Judging by their entire careers tbh. Where did the idea that Broad is a better batsman than Swann even come from? His Dad? There's literally NOTHING that has EVER happened to suggest that. Swanny has four FC centuries.

It's a selectorial absolute joke that seems to have been widely missed.

All true. However, I suppose it's happened because Broad was actually batting very well at 8 for a while before Swann was picked and it would have seemed odd to demote him to number 9. Given the talk of Broad looking like becoming a genuine number 7, they'd have been slaughtered for moving him down the order at that point. Plus Swann was an unknown quantity at this level. However, that was then.