Overseas players in Test teams

[royGilchrist]

But the Beckham example you gave is a good one in the sense, that maybe cricket also needs strong high profile club competition, like soccer. Maybe the answer is not what Hogg suggested, but the answer is maybe to have a club competition soccer style.

This will provide opportunity to a lot more players to play whose careers never gets any notice as its so diffcult to make it to the test side in cricket, and no one cares to watch domestic competition.

And this experimentation with trading players could also happen easily in that case.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Is it better to watch eleven loyal austrailians beat the crap out of eleven loyal bangladeshis, or is it better to watch a tight match between Austrailia and Bangladesh with Bangladesh comprising of non-bangladeshi players (perhaps even Aussie discards).

In what way does that possibly help Bangladeshi cricket? How can they improve if they don't even play? In fact, why even call them Bangladesh in that case?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

but the answer is maybe to have a club competition soccer style.

This will provide opportunity to a lot more players to play whose careers never gets any notice as its so diffcult to make it to the test side in cricket, and no one cares to watch domestic competition.

And this experimentation with trading players could also happen easily in that case.

Alas, there are only 12 months in a year....

 

[Neil Pickup]

In what way does that possibly help Bangladeshi cricket? How can they improve if they don't even play? In fact, why even call them Bangladesh in that case?

Couldn't have put it better myself.

 

[Rik]

Hmmmm...to be fair this EU rule means that England could pick a team of South Africans and Australians quite easily...they basically are overseas players, but qualified for England.

 

[Neil Pickup]

After they've served the naturalisation period, qualifying them as English, as Hick did before the "EU rule" existed, making no difference at all when it comes to representing England.

 

[Rik]

After they've served the naturalisation period, qualifying them as English, as Hick did before the "EU rule" existed, making no difference at all when it comes to representing England.

Yup, but the end result is similer to Hogg's suggestion, a player from overseas playing for another country.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Very tenuous.

Hogg's suggestion is mercenaries of other nationalities playing for "national" teams. By the time Pietersen/Hick play for England, they are English.

 

[marc71178]

Hmmmm...to be fair this EU rule means that England could pick a team of South Africans and Australians quite easily...they basically are overseas players, but qualified for England.

Except they can't, or we'd definitely have a much different line up to that which we have (no Clarke for a start!)

 

[royGilchrist]

In what way does that possibly help Bangladeshi cricket? How can they improve if they don't even play? In fact, why even call them Bangladesh in that case?

-The goal of ICC is not to improve bangladeshi cricket, but to provide competitive matches to the viewers

-Having a Bangladeshi team comprise of 8 locals and four foreign players, will I think bring B. cricket up to speed faster. A bit like English cricket and cricketers were much better when in the counties there was less restriction for foreign players

Alas, there are only 12 months in a year....

If this means leaving out some Aus/Bang. or Aus/Zim matches to make room for more competitive club matches, so be it.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Au contraire. They've (ICC) let Bangladesh in and now, they'll have to do whatever they can to improve their cricket. Imagine if the ICC had given up on New Zealand or South Africa...