It’s time we looked at one of the most polarising issues in cricket. I can’t ignore it any more. If you’re a South Africa supporter, an England supporter, or a Hampshire supporter in particular, your interest is going to be piqued and your stomach might well turn.
For starters let me make my own position on kolpak players clear: I’m utterly conflicted. Like most England cricket fans I can see the benefits of South Africans moving to the UK – where would we have been without the likes Kevin Pietersen and Jonathan Trott over the years? – but I do feel slightly uncomfortable when former internationals move to counties without any intention (or possibility) of playing for England.
Basically these cricketers come across as mercenaries who might block the progress of promising young English players. But on the flip side it’s good when they raise the standard of county cricket – as Hampshire’s latest recruit, Kyle Abbott, will surely do.
What’s more, I have some sympathy if the player in question isn’t being selected for South Africa (or hasn’t been selected as much as he should) because of his skin colour. A career as a professional cricketer can be very short; so it makes financial sense to cash in when one can. As a large number of Kolpak players have families to support, it seems unfair to criticise people for looking after their nearest and dearest.
Basically this whole issue is extremely complicated and there are no absolutes. One thing, however, is crystal clear. The kolpak ruling is no bloody good for South Africa at all. Take the example of Hampshire’s other recent signing, Rilee Rossouw (not to be confused with Renee Russo).
When I first heard that Hants had signed a South African opener, I assumed he would be a squad fodder. I didn’t immediately recognise his name (sorry Rilee!) but a bit of digging soon put me right. Rossouw is actually a highly promising player. He’s 27 years old, has a first class average of 44 with eighteen hundreds, and he’s averaged 39 in over thirty ODIs. He’s also a more than handy T20 player.
It seems desperately unfortunate that players of this quality are leaving their homeland to move to the effing Rose Bowl. It’s also a tad depressing that Hampshire – who deserved to be relegated from division one of the championship last year but were reprieved due to Durham’s financial plight – can solve their problems by throwing money at foreign players.
The whole situation is as utterly disgusting as it is completely understandable. What on earth are we supposed to make of it all?
James Morgan
I really struggle to have a reasoned opinion on this one. But here goes:
You can’t blame the players for the reason you give: they’ve a living to earn and the honour of being a Bok doesn’t feed the kids.
So does it really have an impact on England cricket? Prof Stefan Symanski argues that English football is better off for forge in players (many will argue but he makes a cogent case). County cricket is full of very good club players who will never make it to the international scene, so if Abbott squeezes on of those out the Hampshire side county cricket is better and future England players better prepared.
Does it feel right these players coming over hear and taking the places of British players? sound familiar?
I think it depends how many Kolpak players are representing county teams. One or two good ones (like Abbott) is probably fine, but a few years ago it was getting ridiculous. A few counties basically consistent of 4 or 5 second rate kolpak players who were no better than the young English guys in the second XI. The only difference was experience.
Without wishing to stray into the realm of politics or argue the rights and wrongs, won’t Brexit (assuming it happens…) mean that the Kolpak ruling no longer applies in this country? In the meantime James I share your frustration. I can’t really blame the players for taking the opportunity of making a good living, but I’m also uneasy about the implications for the English game. Abbott and Rossouw are not exactly bit part players.
I suppose you could argue that in a way we’ve been here before (albeit under very different circumstances) when you think of the great players from overseas who enriched the County Championship and limited overseas competitions during the ’70s, ’80s and ’90s. I don’t think anyone would argue now that the likes of Barry Richards, Gordon Greenidge, Malcolm Marshall or Andy Roberts (to name a few who all happened to play for Hampshire) were a bad thing for English cricket. However the differences between now and then to my mind far outweigh the similarities. The game was immeasurably more popular 30 or 40 years ago. The counties were in better financial health and could afford to retain bigger playing staffs, so the impact on aspiring young English born players was less. The biggest difference though is that player remuneration was much more modest and it wasn’t simply an arms race in terms of which counties could throw the most cash at overseas stars.
The kolpak rule won’t apply if / when we leave the EU. But I’m pretty sure that players who sign up before Brexit comes into effect will be able to stay afterwards. That’s why we’re currently seeing a rush of kolpak signings now … before the drawbridge comes up (for want of a better expression).
That might be right. 4 Saffers have jumped in the last week or less: David Wiese and Marchant de Lange have joined Roussouw and Abbott. All of them have international experience, and the SA talent pool is reduced as a result.
Young English players will still get their chance and the best ones will push their way through and when they make it to the test side should hopefully be better for it.
It seems to have been forgotten that Hampshire do still produce their own players and do so for England. Vince, Dawson recent test and ODI caps. Alsop with the Lions.
Last season Hampshire gave lots of chances to youngsters and there will still be chances this coming season.
Vince and Dawson, eh? Remind me, how has that worked out so far? Both have long and storied test careers ahead of them, do you think?
It hasn’t worked out but they are still trying. Are we going to have a go at all the counties who don’t produce anyone or produce somebody but they fail at the highest level? No of course not and hopefully a better standard means less journeyman and average county cricketers.
I can remember watching Sobers play for Notts Richards, Greg Chappellike and Garner for Somerset, Clive Lloyd and Colin Croft for Lancashire as well as Hampshire players mentioned. All of them improved the English game. What sticks in the craw, though, is that Durham were relegated because they don’t have a rich backer like Rod Bransgrove and that rich backer uses his money to buy “ready made” foreign players, particularly those of international quality. As a related point could Abbott and Rousouw not have made enough money in leagues like the IPL and Big Bash? Both are very capable T20 players.
I’ve seen mention that Abbott has a clause in his contract that he can go to the IPL while at Hampshire.
Although the Cricinfo story on the background to the Abbott deal contradicts that. I guess we’ll have to wait and see – although I suspect Abbott wouldn’t have been in the running for a very good IPL deal anyway.
I tweeted George Dobell to ask him if he knew if he would be free to play IPL and he didn’t think so but others think it may be possible for him to play IPL if picked up.
He has played in the last two IPL tournaments and as a reasonable death bowler of which there are not that many I would expect him to be picked at auction assuming his contract at Hampshire allows him to play.
On the subject of the IPL, the Mail are reporting that Ben Stokes is going into this year’s auction.
I think you have to be an international player if you want to get selected in the IPL, there’s something like that along the rules.
I have always been confused about the Kolpak rules as it seems there are no restrictions on SA players coming here but my understanding is that obstacles remain to UK citizens working in SA (which is relevant as equivalence on each side – supposedly the basis of the ruling – would mean promising English players also get overseas opportunities). Nevertheless, I am not sure that the influx of cricketers has done much harm to the development of English players……with one exception.
There are typically 5-6 batting slots available in a county team, so the loss of one to a Kolpak signing will not impact a truly promising bat. There are also 3-4 seamer slots so the same argument applies. However, typically, counties only play one specialist spinner (perhaps backed up with spinning all rounders). So signing a Kolpak or overseas spinner can completely block the emergence of a promising spinner. I fear this will be the case at Derbyshire in 2017 where the signing of Imran Tahir is likely to mean Matt Critchley will have to get his place as an all rounder and is likely to bowl far fewer overs, even if he plays. And the effect can be clearly seen at Warwickshire where Poysden struggles to get a game whilst Jeetan Patel is the overseas player.
Superb point Andy. I forgot to mention the spinners. You can understand why Warwickshire want to keep a bowler as good as Patel around. He’ll be a good mentor to Poysden but at some point the latter is going to need regular first team cricket.
Personally on an individual basis both players will take the place in the squad of someone thst quite honestly would never be considered for England so meh..
However, there is a balance to find between allowing the talent in from anywhere to ensure you try and make your competition a good high quality league and ensuring there is enough motivation for clubs to actually produce and give youth a shot.
I feel there are way too many joe avaerage players and coaches and adminers in the game right now so there is space for some quality.
How the hell can Hampshire, or any county, afford to pay a player to play in front of empty stands, more than they receive as a front line international cricketer?
The ecb make their money from matched against international sides like south Africa, and then use that money to subsidise counties like Hampshire to steal players from their opposition. Does anyone else see the problem here?
Well said AB – and it isn’t only Hampshire because of their rich sugar daddy as some claim. Derbyshire are paying Viljoen a rumoured £170k which is comfortably more than a SA central contract.
When people say cricket is becoming like baseball, they usually mean about big hits and home runs (not that there are actually that many home runs in baseball). But cricket is becoming like baseball in a more profound sense – that domestic tournaments are bigger than the international game. In the short term, the rich countries can beat up the smaller countries and their boards can proclaim how well that proves they’re running the game; in the long term, the rich countries will be the only ones left. Ideally, cricket needs to scrap the 2014 revenue-sharing deal but if that’s impossible then a fund to redistribute wealth to ensure minimum levels of central contracts is essential for the game.
Just to be clear – both CSA and the SA government are not without fault. But with the best governance in the world, they’d still be functioning in a global system where their players (unless they can get an IPL windfall) will take 3-4 years to earn what Alastair Cook is going to be paid for sitting on his backside for the next five months.
My old man used to point out that having loads of foreigners in Premiership football teams can’t make much difference to the England team because they were crap before this was the case, too…
All it does it makes it less attractive for bang average players which isn’t a bad thing. Just look at the amount of bang average players around in cricket currently making a darn good living (when you take into account wages, free food, clothing, gym, personal training, cost of equipment, hiring of nets, sponsored cars/clothes etc).. suddenly when you add on these things their salary isn’t that bad !
Well, yes, but they might go in for other sports, and we might be deprived of an exceptional talent. For example, Usain Bolt and Yohan Blake are both talented fast bowlers, who could probably have made a living playing cricket. However, athletics pays better (in WI) so they took that route (and have enhanced athletics). 40 years (or more) ago, a young Jamaican 400m runner had to decide between athletics (then amateur) and cricket. Fortunately for everyone (except opposition batsmen!), Michael Anthony Holding chose cricket.
If you make it to test level then the rewards should be massive. For non test players, not so much. Make being the best rewarding.. not average
People,seem to forget with wages all the free stuff cricketers get, so a bang average cricketer earning 30k when you add it all up is actually earning double their wage if you added it all up
Cars
Physical trainers
Physics
Hire of indoor lanes
Outdoor lanes
Batting kit
Fielding kit
Training kit
Trainers
Club kit
Free food
Free hotel stays
Free transport
Free drink all the time
That’s just some of it. Just add th cost of clothing and equipment and to have use of a gym, nets and pysio and pt daily… doubled your wage of 30k easily
I’d prefer to see counties bringing in players like Abbott who are well ahead of players like
Shantrey from Worcestershire for example.. any of the Northants, Leicestershire or Derbyshire bowlers … etc etc.
Just go through each county and it’s shocking how many are stealing a living