Yes, Michael Bracewell missed trip for Bangladesh T20Is and Pakistan ODIs (which were cancelled). This was the tour where the entire World T20I squad were "rested" or were playing IPL. Bracewell selection was mentioned in NZC release at the time, note as an " all-rounder", big hint that NZ selectors were interested in his bowling. Not mentioned was who replaced Bracewell, perhaps McConchie?Cricket Wellington's post suggests Macewell was called up for a previous tour but turned it down due to the birth of his first child
This needs to stopHe's back to being eligible for New Zealand the day after this series finishes.
Associate Member to Full Member.
No it does not.This needs to stop
Changing nationality is changing nationality, pure and simple. Allowing full members to cherry-pick the best Associate based talent based on the discrepancy in qualification times is a disincentive to the associate team.No it does not.
Discouraging players from playing for their associate nations out of fear they'll be prevented from playing for the full member nations they're trying to qualify for (and in most cases even be prevented from playing in their domestic leagues as local players) will weaken rather than strengthen the depth of international cricket.
Yep. And if you can't do it in a reasonable timeframe, associate cricketers won't play for associate nations in the first place.Changing nationality is changing nationality, pure and simple.
Full Members are always going to do this tho. Associate cricketers can make a living playing domestix in Full Member countries, if they need to serve 3 years there to qualify for them they gladly will.Changing nationality is changing nationality, pure and simple. Allowing full members to cherry-pick the best Associate based talent based on the discrepancy in qualification times is a disincentive to the associate team.
England and West Indies aren't nations; cricket is sport - it's all made up.Changing nationality is changing nationality, pure and simple. Allowing full members to cherry-pick the best Associate based talent based on the discrepancy in qualification times is a disincentive to the associate team.
I wondered that; it should be considered and played as one, but I assume it isn't given the lack of debutants being noted at the bottom of the scorecard.I wonder if this game today is a ListA?
Seem to have 12th mean (according to the scorecard) rather than 12-a-side.
cricket archive have it as 'misc' rather than ListA.
Just curious if this is Pringle, Boyle and Tashkoff's senior debuts or not.
2fa now.And then he bowls himself ahead of some of the other spinners in the team as is par for the course
Got a wicket though so can't really complain
Cricinfo have it down as List A with Tashkoff, Boyle and Pringle all making their List A debuts.I wondered that; it should be considered and played as one, but I assume it isn't given the lack of debutants being noted at the bottom of the scorecard.