[Cricket] LV= County Championship Division One, Nottinghamshire v Sussex at Nottingham, Sep 15-18

[HAILSHAM SEAGULL]

Goff strikes again, 36-2.

 

[HAILSHAM SEAGULL]

Magoffin now is the countries leading wicket taker, 65 wkts @ 20.13 and an economy rate of 2.61 off over 500 overs.
Tremendous effort.

 

[Postman Pat]

Yorkshire have history with Kolpak players, insofar as they are not well disposed towards them. This isn't a race issue, if more reputable news sources are to be believed, and Prince himself appears not to have made a complaint.

Isn't the comment effectively the same as someone saying to Danny Holla, go back to Holland you Bosman tosser?

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Goff strikes again, 36-2.

That is most definitely it now, though.

Magoffin now is the countries leading wicket taker, 65 wkts @ 20.13 and an economy rate of 2.61 off over 500 overs.
Tremendous effort.

Spectacular figures. We are very lucky to have him.

As I said earlier, SCCC - Joyce - Goff = Northants

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Isn't the comment effectively the same as someone saying to Danny Holla, go back to Holland you Bosman tosser?

No, because the Bosman ruling is only related to players' contracts rather than movement between nations, and thus has no reference to his eligibility to play here (Brighton could field 11 EU players if they wished). In cricket on the other hand, there is an issue of eligibility - only one overseas player is allowed, thus the influx of 'Kolpaks' - players from certain other nations with a qualifying passport, that means they DON't count as the overseas player.

It would be more akin to an opponent of Ulloa, telling him to go home and making reference to his Spanish passport of convenience.

 

[spring hall convert]

Doesn't he play for Ireland?

Didn't Eoin Morgan and Boyd Rankin?

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Didn't Eoin Morgan and Boyd Rankin?

It's in the verb tense. 86/3 btw.

 

[cardboard]

86/3

 

[spring hall convert]

It's in the verb tense. 86/3 btw.

It doesn't matter. If England wanted him to play for them, he'd play for them I'm sure.

It's immaterial anyhow as he won't get picked again.

 

[Eeyore]

No, because the Bosman ruling is only related to players' contracts rather than movement between nations, and thus has no reference to his eligibility to play here (Brighton could field 11 EU players if they wished). In cricket on the other hand, there is an issue of eligibility - only one overseas player is allowed, thus the influx of 'Kolpaks' - players from certain other nations with a qualifying passport, that means they DON't count as the overseas player.

It would be more akin to an opponent of Ulloa, telling him to go home and making reference to his Spanish passport of convenience.

Agreed.

I have always had issues with the number of Kolpak players in county cricket, and the dubious, yet lawful qualifications, of others.

For me, this certainly isn't a race issue, but one of the prevention of home grown players getting their chance. I seem to remember having a real beef with Kent about it.

I agreed with Alan Border once when Andrew Symonds was fast-tracked on to Kent's books, as English qualified, after a splendid performance against a touring England team. I was living in Australia at the time and he was quoted in the media as saying that he couldn't understand how there were no 'red-blooded' Englishman who wouldn't want this opportunity.

This is not to say I oppose players in the England team being of foreign descent. If a lad of 12 years old arrives on these shores, and progresses through the English system, only a racist would say he doesn't deserve his spot. But when someone in their 20s who has already had their training, and appeared in various state teams in the cricket playing nations, jumps ship, then I think home-grown youngsters have a right to bemoan a lack of opportunity.

 

[keaton]

It doesn't matter. If England wanted him to play for them, he'd play for them I'm sure.

It's immaterial anyhow as he won't get picked again.

I think you can only change back once and then after a certain abount of time.

 

[keaton]

No, because the Bosman ruling is only related to players' contracts rather than movement between nations, and thus has no reference to his eligibility to play here (Brighton could field 11 EU players if they wished). In cricket on the other hand, there is an issue of eligibility - only one overseas player is allowed, thus the influx of 'Kolpaks' - players from certain other nations with a qualifying passport, that means they DON't count as the overseas player.

It would be more akin to an opponent of Ulloa, telling him to go home and making reference to his Spanish passport of convenience.

I still can't see your point, Wouldn't be like telling any foreign player to go home?
If he said what is quoted it's not far away from telling a Pole, Indian or Jamaican (for examples) to 'go back to your own country and stop stealing our jobs'?

 

[keaton]

While I dislike the Kolpak rule it did enable us to play Mushy, Saqlain and Goodwin in the same team. Great days

 

[Luke93]

30 overs, 6 wickets needed.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

As I said earlier, SCCC - Joyce - Goff = Northants

I don't think the rest are that bad.
Anyway it could be worse. Could = Leicestershire.

 

[mlg57]

140/5

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I still can't see your point, Wouldn't be like telling any foreign player to go home?
If he said what is quoted it's not far away from telling a Pole, Indian or Jamaican (for examples) to 'go back to your own country and stop stealing our jobs'?

Correct - its no different to that.

I was only really questionning your comparison of the Bosman ruling to the Kolpak regs.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

140/5

That will definitely be it, now.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

I don't think the rest are that bad.
Anyway it could be worse. Could = Leicestershire.

or Surrey.

165/6 now with the charming Chris Read at the crease.

 

[Seagulltonian]

167/7. We appear to be trying to win! That's just not cricket!