English Ringers, mate!

[TT Boy]

Kieswetter is an Englishman, he says so himself.

 

[TT Boy]

 

[TT Boy]

Apologies for the almighty dig, but one always feels slightly proprietorial about one's own threads and the question at hand definitely fits: are we (us poms) in danger of losing our cricketing identity with the sharp upturn in foreign-raised players being selected for our team? It's feasible we might soon see an ODI top order including Trott, Pietersen, Kieswetter & Morgan.

I don't think of myself as too much of a little Englander, but the situation makes me uncomfortable. Two questions come to mind: should we always select on merit even if it means native-raised sons of Albion form a minority in our team; & why are the neo-colonials so much better than those born-and-bred? Coaching? Pitches? Economics?

Prefer this tbh...

Lumb
Kieswetter
Trott
KP
Morgan
Prior

 

[Craig]

Is Prior's parents Saffies or are they Brits who were living/working in SA and then moved to England? Our resident Sussex fan tell me more. A guy at the gym that I visit is from the Old Country (South Africa that is) and he is 100% convinced that Strauss, Trott, and Prior are all South Africans then Englishmen.

 

[Richard]

Every Irishman who has ever gotten good at cricket has played in and, in the relatively rare event he's good enough, for, England.

That won't change, hopefully. Irishmen are notably different from SAfricans.

 

[Craig]

If they are from Norn Iron then I don't think it matters that much in that they are British. Not that I would say that in Belfast for fear of my personal safety.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Is Prior's parents Saffies or are they Brits who were living/working in SA and then moved to England? Our resident Sussex fan tell me more. A guy at the gym that I visit is from the Old Country (South Africa that is) and he is 100% convinced that Strauss, Trott, and Prior are all South Africans then Englishmen.

If you count Strauss as a Saffer then you have to count Andrew Symonds as English.

 

[Briton]

If they want to play for england they're as good as english for my money. What i dont agree with is the players playing county cricket with an EU passport or with English grandparents that have no intention of ever playing for England.

So what is the point of Internationmal cricket if any Tom Dick or Harry can play for the England and Wales team?

 

[Briton]

Every Irishman who has ever gotten good at cricket has played in and, in the relatively rare event he's good enough, for, England.

That won't change, hopefully. Irishmen are notably different from SAfricans.

Same with the Scots.

Actually the England and Wales team has always been the British Isles team in reality.

 

[Briton]

what about the overseas a side
Hussain
Denness
Ranjitsinhji
D'olivera
Lamb
Pietersen
WK
Freddie Brown
Defreitas
Larter(scotland)
Mullaly


struggling for openers and a keeper

Scotland overseas? Riiight.

What about Douglas Jardine? I think he was born in India of Scottish parents.

 

[Uppercut]

If they are from Norn Iron then I don't think it matters that much in that they are British. Not that I would say that in Belfast for fear of my personal safety.

It's not true ftr, hence the country's called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Irish players turning out for England does huge amounts of damage to Irish cricket, and since they're currently the most promising Associate nation, holds back the spread of cricket in general. KP and Kieswetter throwing their lot in with England for social or economic reasons might not sit as easy with people with ridiculous, ignorant and generally really stupid ideas about Ireland (like Richard). But at least it doesn't do a great deal of harm.

 

[Richard]

I think I've pointed-out why my ideas about Ireland are neither ridiculous nor ignorant before now, so I won't do so again.

 

[stumpski]

Apologies for the almighty dig, but one always feels slightly proprietorial about one's own threads and the question at hand definitely fits: are we (us poms) in danger of losing our cricketing identity with the sharp upturn in foreign-raised players being selected for our team? It's feasible we might soon see an ODI top order including Trott, Pietersen, Kieswetter & Morgan.

I don't think of myself as too much of a little Englander, but the situation makes me uncomfortable. Two questions come to mind: should we always select on merit even if it means native-raised sons of Albion form a minority in our team; & why are the neo-colonials so much better than those born-and-bred? Coaching? Pitches? Economics?

Might it also be the case that in South Africa (if not Ireland) they (a) have a climate more conducive to outdoor games; and (b) still play cricket in schools?

I would like to see there being some sort of limit placed on the number of overseas-born players in the England side at any one time (I always exclude Strauss and Prior from this consideration btw), if only to try to put an end to the digs we inevitably get from Aus/SA supporters, and others ... and recent remarks from Geoff Miller suggest this is playing on his mind as well. Trouble is I don't see how it can be achieved. If a South African playing county cricket becomes qualified for England, he can't be kept out of the side on a quota basis can he?

 

[Richard]

It'd be utterly ridiculous to deliberately shoot the side in the foot - to ostensibly ignore a player who'd strengthen the side purely for the sake of avoiding jibes. If you've just thrashed a side and the best they can fire back with is "well your side's full of foreigners anyway", stuff 'em. The rules are currently what the rules are currently - teams can play to those rules, and if different sides exploit them to different extents, that's their problem.

Also there's no way to differentiate between "foreign-born" and "foreign-raised" in actual stipulation, yet morally speaking (ie, "England benefiting from what others have sown") there's a World of difference. Strauss and Prior are totally, completely separate cases from Pietersen, Trott and, now apparently, Kieswetter.

As I've said, I myself would fully support a mandate changing the current 3 years of half-yearly residential qualification to 10 4\5ths-yearly (or similar) residential qualification. But until such a change in regulations happens, you're a fool if you don't play by the current regulations.

 

[stumpski]

Well clearly it wouldn't be done (and won't be done, anyway) just to avoid criticism and sour grapes. But if we reached a point where the foreign-born (and raised) players were in a majority - if there were more South African voices in the changing room than English - should we expect the Barmy Army and others to follow them as loyally as ever? I'm not sure I'd happily hand over two days' pay to watch such an England team, tbh.

 

[Richard]

Personally I support teams because I've grown into supporting them, for whatever reasons. I'm a Man Utd fan not because I have any real connection with Manchester (the relatively tenuous connection is that my Grandad, who died 16 years before I was born, at one point worked at the ground and thus he, and later Dad, were fans - I joined the family tradition). I'm an England fan because they're the team I've grown into supporting - nothing is ever going to change that.

It'd rather disappoint me if people would lose their allegiance to a team just because of its makeup of a certain time. I've never seen support as something which has a "point" - a r'aison d'etre - merely something that was once instinctive and has remained so.

Indeed, you could look at the England dressing-room at various points between about 1980 and 1995 and find plenty of foreign-raised (to some extent) players - Smith, Lamb, Malcolm, Lewis, Small, Radford, etc.) and I don't know that the fan-base ever suffered as a result, for instance.

 

[stumpski]

Personally I support teams because I've grown into supporting them, for whatever reasons. I'm a Man Utd fan not because I have any real connection with Manchester (the relatively tenuous connection is that my Grandad, who died 16 years before I was born, at one point worked at the ground and thus he, and later Dad, were fans - I joined the family tradition). I'm an England fan because they're the team I've grown into supporting - nothing is ever going to change that.

It'd rather disappoint me if people would lose their allegiance to a team just because of its makeup of a certain time. I've never seen support as something which has a "point" - a r'aison d'etre - merely something that was once instinctive and has remained so.

Indeed, you could look at the England dressing-room at various points between about 1980 and 1995 and find plenty of foreign-raised (to some extent) players - Smith, Lamb, Malcolm, Lewis, Small, Radford, etc.) and I don't know that the fan-base ever suffered as a result, for instance.

And because I presume that's where you've lived all your life? I don't consider myself an 'England supporter' per se - I'm English and I'm into cricket, so I don't feel I really have any choice in the matter. It isn't practical for me to decide to start supporting, say, New Zealand. County allegiance is another matter, of course. You make a good point about the players used in the 1980s and early 90s - I think someone has worked out that one team from that period had 6 or 7 players born outside the UK - but the West Indian contingent were a different case, in that they'd all come here as children. It's not as if Devon Malcolm was playing for Jamaica while waiting to qualify for England. And there was some sympathy for Lamb and the Smith brothers in as much as they couldn't play Tests for the country of their birth.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Might it also be the case that in South Africa (if not Ireland) they (a) have a climate more conducive to outdoor games; and (b) still play cricket in schools?

I would like to see there being some sort of limit placed on the number of overseas-born players in the England side at any one time (I always exclude Strauss and Prior from this consideration btw), if only to try to put an end to the digs we inevitably get from Aus/SA supporters, and others ... and recent remarks from Geoff Miller suggest this is playing on his mind as well. Trouble is I don't see how it can be achieved. If a South African playing county cricket becomes qualified for England, he can't be kept out of the side on a quota basis can he?

I would imagine early exposure to cricket must help in players' developments. I'd hazard a guess that of the native-raised members of the England squad, those who didn't attend fee-paying schools were introduced by the club route.

& I don't think we can (legally) or should legislate for a certain number of English-raised players, but (without wishing to come over all Norman Tebbit) we are in danger of losing something. Or, with the loss of cricket to the majority of state schools, perhaps we've already lost it and this is the result?

 

[Furball]

It's not true ftr, hence the country's called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Geographically you're right, however anyone who holds a UK passport is a subject of her Brittanic Majesty, making them British subjects.

I think I've pointed-out why my ideas about Ireland are neither ridiculous nor ignorant before now, so I won't do so again.

Your ideas about Ireland are ignorant.

 

[four_or_six]

Although I can understand the qualms about the situation, I would rather the team represents the country by upholding values of equality towards those qualified to play for us rather than representing the country by favouring English-born players.