View Full Version : A problem with cricket
CharlieG
31 Dec 2002, 14:54
There is a basic fault in international cricket. I'm not pretending to have the answer, but something needs to be done.
At the moment, any of Australia's first 11 would walk straight into any other side in the world. That's fine, it's a testament to the quality of Australia's development system. But the problem is that there are other players outside the regular 11 who can only get the occasional Test, who would also walk into many other teams. The likes of Martin Love, Ryan Campbell, Andy Bichel, Stuart MacGill, Jimmy Maher and Simon Katich are all good enough to play at an international level. That's not a comprehensive list, just off the top of my head. But with the exception of Bichel (who has on 1 occasion got into the side on form) and probably in the near future Love, all of these players have to rely on injuries to represent their country. These players, who are all easily inside the world's 100 top cricketers, aren't getting the oppurtunity they deserve.
What are people's thoughts? Is there a way to offer these players the chance to use their talent to it's full potential?
dr nick
31 Dec 2002, 14:56
:rolleyes:
CharlieG
31 Dec 2002, 15:00
Got anything constructive to add Nicko?
If not, don't bother posting. Tell me this. How is an 18 year old from Bangladesh who wouldn't get a game for Tasmania more worthy of regular Tests than Maher or MacGill?
dr nick
31 Dec 2002, 15:05
Originally posted by CharlieG
Got anything constructive to add Nicko?
If not, don't bother posting. Tell me this. How is an 18 year old from Bangladesh who wouldn't get a game for Tasmania more worthy of regular Tests than Maher or MacGill?
you are a moron charlie. how is that a fault of cricket?? its one of it's great strengths. are you suggesting we have some sort of draft system ala the AFL so martyn love gan get drafted into the kenyan team?? the bangladeshi is more worthy of regular tests because he is in the best 11 for his country.
Bomber Spirit
31 Dec 2002, 15:06
Originally posted by CharlieG
What are people's thoughts? Is there a way to offer these players the chance to use their talent to it's full potential? A passport draft?
Unfortunately for so many players at the moment Australian cricket is so strong that they'll never get a look in.
Shield cricket is often a higher standard than Test cricket these days. It's certainly closer and more competitive.
CharlieG
31 Dec 2002, 15:10
I told you, I don't have the answer.
But in my opinion, why it's a fault of cricket is that it drags down the standard. Instead of a 10-team competition of the world's best, with the world's best 120 players taking part, you have teams like Bangladesh and to a lesser extent Zimbabwe that simply can't compete. It would even up the standard to a certain extent if, under the model you mentioned, players who weren't able to make Australia's top 11 could then go and find a greener pasture.
Charlie
Originally posted by CharlieG
I told you, I don't have the answer.
But in my opinion, why it's a fault of cricket is that it drags down the standard. Instead of a 10-team competition of the world's best, with the world's best 120 players taking part, you have teams like Bangladesh and to a lesser extent Zimbabwe that simply can't compete. It would even up the standard to a certain extent if, under the model you mentioned, players who weren't able to make Australia's top 11 could then go and find a greener pasture.
Charlie
That's what the likes of Craig White, Alan Mullaly, Martin McCague, Jason Gallian, Andy Caddick have done... :D
Desredandwhite
31 Dec 2002, 15:14
Well, I don't think it's a problem with cricket per se. It's a shame for the 2nd tier players, but it's a "problem" that most countries/teams/whatever would love to have.
You could solve it by playing for another country, if that's what you want.
No different to footy really. A player may leave a strong team for a better chance at a weaker team. The problem here is that REPRESENTING YOUR COUNTRY does mean something (a little moreso than a "career" with a club).
Heck, I wouldn't mind Brazil's 2nd XI soccer team playing for australia ;-)
dr nick
31 Dec 2002, 15:15
Originally posted by CharlieG
I told you, I don't have the answer.
But in my opinion, why it's a fault of cricket is that it drags down the standard. Instead of a 10-team competition of the world's best, with the world's best 120 players taking part, you have teams like Bangladesh and to a lesser extent Zimbabwe that simply can't compete. It would even up the standard to a certain extent if, under the model you mentioned, players who weren't able to make Australia's top 11 could then go and find a greener pasture.
Charlie
i suppose you think its a problem with the olympics as well then???
go lie down, youve lost it.
CharlieG
31 Dec 2002, 15:42
Originally posted by nicko18
i suppose you think its a problem with the olympics as well then???
go lie down, youve lost it.
I haven't lost it. You have. You lost it when you let a personal situation interfere with your answer for a serious question.
Or perhaps you can't just think outside the square.
What is required to play for another country? The only instances I can think of (of the top of my head) are Kepler Wessels playing for Australia and Murray Goodwin for Zimbabwe. Wessels played here because SA wasn't a Test nation at the time, Goodwin had citizenship in Zimbabwe at the time. Do you have to take out citizenship?
Bomber Spirit
31 Dec 2002, 15:49
Originally posted by CharlieG
What is required to play for another country? The only instances I can think of (of the top of my head) are Kepler Wessels playing for Australia and Murray Goodwin for Zimbabwe. Wessels played here because SA wasn't a Test nation at the time, Goodwin had citizenship in Zimbabwe at the time. Do you have to take out citizenship? Yes. And that involves living there. But a lot of these players would be much happier staying home, and earning much more money, playing first class cricket at home and county cricket during the off-season than they would going to some war-torn cricketing backwater.
You used to have to serve a qualifying period if your only reason for moving was cricket. Graham Hick had to wait until he was past his best before he was allowed to play for England. But I'm not sure whether that still applies.
Originally posted by CharlieG
I haven't lost it. You have. You lost it when you let a personal situation interfere with your answer for a serious question.
Or perhaps you can't just think outside the square.
What is required to play for another country? The only instances I can think of (of the top of my head) are Kepler Wessels playing for Australia and Murray Goodwin for Zimbabwe. Wessels played here because SA wasn't a Test nation at the time, Goodwin had citizenship in Zimbabwe at the time. Do you have to take out citizenship?
Goodwin was born there.
TheMase
31 Dec 2002, 16:59
Originally posted by Bomber Spirit
Yes. And that involves living there. But a lot of these players would be much happier staying home, and earning much more money, playing first class cricket at home and county cricket during the off-season than they would going to some war-torn cricketing backwater.
You used to have to serve a qualifying period if your only reason for moving was cricket. Graham Hick had to wait until he was past his best before he was allowed to play for England. But I'm not sure whether that still applies.
Im pretty sure its 4 years...
You can't just say its a problem with cricket. All sports have these types of periods where one team absolutely dominates the world and there are many players who can't get a look in when they would just about anywhere else in the world.
Your suggestion would completely undermine the value of test cricket and representing one's country.
Navy Master
1 Jan 2003, 17:55
Another problem is the boring patch in one dayers. I would like to see them trial 40 over one day games (like in my comp)
I tohught I heard something in the last couple of months that teams could perhaps 'draft' another player from another country to their country for the perpose of playing test cricket for a year Then that player would return to his country of origin.
Or maybe I just dreamt it, I don't know sometimes.:o :p
i sincerely hope you dreamt it. this sport would soon become a farce at international level ala the rugby league world cup if that started to happen.
Maybe a good way to give the blokes who are not getting a game for Australia some exposure is to continue with The Australia A concept as they are good enough to beat most other cricket nations in either tests or one dayers
red+black
3 Jan 2003, 09:48
Originally posted by Lethal
I tohught I heard something in the last couple of months that teams could perhaps 'draft' another player from another country to their country for the perpose of playing test cricket for a year Then that player would return to his country of origin.
Or maybe I just dreamt it, I don't know sometimes.:o :p
you are correct. it was been mentioned at board level that in the future Australia A cricketers could play for overseas nations, such as with the county cricket system. so jimmy maher and nathan bracken could play for bangladesh for example. i think the problem is letting these sh1te teams in in the first place. bangladesh couldn't beat a high school team. kenya would have been more deserving of test status.