Ballance, Rankin Anglicised

[jaybro]

Credit to England and their setup that everyone wants to play for them. Wouldn't have been the case 15 years ago.

Is the English setup really that good ?? Or do they just benefit from a few significant factors ??

* They have the advantage of holding their 1st class season whilst everyone else is in their ' Off season ' ..... Which means everyone else holds their 1st class season at the same time so many overseas players looking for 'work in the winter ' head for England for County cricket or club cricket.
The overseas players end up in the English system one way or another then are held to ' ransome ' being foreced to choose ' Club over Country ' and sign kolpak deals to earn their wage playing County Cricket. Or young players end playing so much cricket there they become eligable over time and are given the opportunity to represent England.

*Also many players from South Africa and Zimbabwe who are ' Disillusioned ' with the going ons in their Country and are looking abroad for the chance to play International Cricket will feel that England is the ' right choice ' due to Their families ansestors being from England. This also applies for the couple of Irish players changing their alligances to England for the chance to play Test Cricket they probably feel England is also the right choice since they're all part of Britan. Even the Dutch have lost one of their most promising young batsman to the Poms Alex Kervezee.

Fair enough England has a strong 1st class and club setup but are these factors the main reason why many foreign players are choosing to represent England ???

......or am I just a bitter Aussie ???

[ZIMDOGGY]

spot on Jaybro, spot on.

They certainly wouldnt all flock to England like they do for the lifestyle.... England has gone downhill horribly the last decade or so. In livability they would be way behind Australia and New Zealand nowadays ( Not just the weather) and it really is sad, the politicians and do gooders have let a mighty empire weaken and rot. We are starting to see a new influx of brits downhere who've sworn never to return.

Also to be noted apart from what you said is that is alot of white zimbo's have pure british and irish heritage and already hold passports to the old dart, and consider themselves both british and zimbabwean. As for the irish descendants its really easy as 2 years ago or so anyone with irish heritage can claim an irish passport, part of some homecoming migration scheme. I could claim one, alot of people on this forum can also....and more pertinently pj moor, the ervines and nathan waller can too.

The white afrikaners dont have the same luxury though. Blignaut couldnt have done it, nor could mark vermeulen.

[Conant]

Who is Rankin? I looked him up and I thought he was Irish.

He is. Another one of their finest poached by the boys next door. Noticed that his debut cap was given to him by fellow Irishman Morgan...

Adding insult to injury

[Contra]

Who is Rankin? I looked him up and I thought he was Irish.

He is. Another one of their finest poached by the boys next door. Noticed that his debut cap was given to him by fellow Irishman Morgan...

Nobody was "poached". Rankin retired from Ireland cricket last summer of his own accord so that he could represent England. Had he been "poached" (which no player is, by any country) he would've played immediately rather than waiting a year to make his England senior debut. He shouldn't be in the side but that has nothing to do with his nationality.

[samedwards]

Who is Rankin? I looked him up and I thought he was Irish.

He is. Another one of their finest poached by the boys next door. Noticed that his debut cap was given to him by fellow Irishman Morgan...

Nobody was "poached". Rankin retired from Ireland cricket last summer of his own accord so that he could represent England. Had he been "poached" (which no player is, by any country) he would've played immediately rather than waiting a year to make his England senior debut. He shouldn't be in the side but that has nothing to do with his nationality.

Of course, he was poached. Giles refused to offer him a contract for Warwickshire unless he retired for Ireland. Then Rankin is asked to play T20s despite the fact that he has not played T20s for Warwickshire for past three years, is old, and is injury-prone, instead of a younger fitter bowler who has been performing well in T20s. The only reason I can see is that Giles wished to make him ineligible for Ireland.

[Contra]

Nobody was "poached". Rankin retired from Ireland cricket last summer of his own accord so that he could represent England. Had he been "poached" (which no player is, by any country) he would've played immediately rather than waiting a year to make his England senior debut. He shouldn't be in the side but that has nothing to do with his nationality.

Of course, he was poached. Giles refused to offer him a contract for Warwickshire unless he retired for Ireland. Then Rankin is asked to play T20s despite the fact that he has not played T20s for Warwickshire for past three years, is old, and is injury-prone, instead of a younger fitter bowler who has been performing well in T20s. The only reason I can see is that Giles wished to make him ineligible for Ireland.

So by the county, not by England. He was also turning out for three teams (Ireland, Warwickshire and the Lions) which is a physical strain on an already injury-prone player, and he had to prioritise the job that earns him his wages (Warwickshire) and his chance at playing cricket at the highest possible level (England). He was also entirely within his rights to say no. He's actually been playing county cricket at one level or another since he was nineteen, so he's very much a product of English cricket; considering he's come out of their domestic system, why shouldn't they be allowed to reap the benefits?

I actually agree with you entirely on everything else (although 28/29 is hardly old), and he should not have been called up by England. But I grow so tired of the way people talk as if the ECB trot the globe looking for players and saying to themselves "He looks good, we'll have him", before clubbing them over the head and bundling them into a sack to be taken back to England for indoctrination.

[samedwards]

So by the county, not by England.

Well Giles is Warwickshire and England.

He was also turning out for three teams (Ireland, Warwickshire and the Lions) which is a physical strain on an already injury-prone player, and he had to prioritise the job that earns him his wages (Warwickshire) and his chance at playing cricket at the highest possible level (England).

Actually he was not playing for the Lions when he was asked to retire. And regarding playing at the highest level, I blame the ICC for that mess of not allowing an Irish player to turn out for his team at the highest level of the game.

He was also entirely within his rights to say no.

True. but how may players would say no to a fatter paycheck and a chance to play one Test? But he has acted stupidly. Giles would use him like Darren Pattinson and give him a Test or two. Rankin could have led the Irish attack in their debut Test, but he decided to be misguided by Giles.

He's actually been playing county cricket at one level or another since he was nineteen, so he's very much a product of English cricket; considering he's come out of their domestic system, why shouldn't they be allowed to reap the benefits?

And he has been playing for Ireland since his U-13 days. And England have other good bowlers, they don't need Rankin. Their only reason for selecting him was to make him ineligible for the Irish.

I actually agree with you entirely on everything else (although 28/29 is hardly old), and he should not have been called up by England. But I grow so tired of the way people talk as if the ECB trot the globe looking for players and saying to themselves "He looks good, we'll have him", before clubbing them over the head and bundling them into a sack to be taken back to England for indoctrination.

Well, it isn't as simple as that. But you have to ask the question as to why the English would rather select a foreign player when they already have many good, in fact better players playing in the county circuit.They have players like Roland-Jones, Tremlett, Topley, Liddle,Mascarenhas, Nash, Croft,Taylor, etc. yet they prefer to pick Ballance and Rankin.

[Contra]

So by the county, not by England.

Well Giles is Warwickshire and England.

He was also turning out for three teams (Ireland, Warwickshire and the Lions) which is a physical strain on an already injury-prone player, and he had to prioritise the job that earns him his wages (Warwickshire) and his chance at playing cricket at the highest possible level (England).

Actually he was not playing for the Lions when he was asked to retire. And regarding playing at the highest level, I blame the ICC for that mess of not allowing an Irish player to turn out for his team at the highest level of the game.

He was also entirely within his rights to say no.

True. but how may players would say no to a fatter paycheck and a chance to play one Test? But he has acted stupidly. Giles would use him like Darren Pattinson and give him a Test or two. Rankin could have led the Irish attack in their debut Test, but he decided to be misguided by Giles.

He's actually been playing county cricket at one level or another since he was nineteen, so he's very much a product of English cricket; considering he's come out of their domestic system, why shouldn't they be allowed to reap the benefits?

And he has been playing for Ireland since his U-13 days. And England have other good bowlers, they don't need Rankin. Their only reason for selecting him was to make him ineligible for the Irish.

I actually agree with you entirely on everything else (although 28/29 is hardly old), and he should not have been called up by England. But I grow so tired of the way people talk as if the ECB trot the globe looking for players and saying to themselves "He looks good, we'll have him", before clubbing them over the head and bundling them into a sack to be taken back to England for indoctrination.

Well, it isn't as simple as that. But you have to ask the question as to why the English would rather select a foreign player when they already have many good, in fact better players playing in the county circuit.They have players like Roland-Jones, Tremlett, Topley, Liddle,Mascarenhas, Nash, Croft,Taylor, etc. yet they prefer to pick Ballance and Rankin.

Rankin debuted for the Lions in August 2011; he withdrew from Ireland cricket in August 2012. So actually, he was playing for them and Ireland simultaneously. And while the ICC is at fault for not providing necessary support for cricket in the Associate nations, the infrastructure in Irish cricket isn't good enough for a player of genuine international quality. Likewise, he's a product of English cricket as much as Irish cricket because he was nurtured in England just as much as in Ireland - if not moreso - because there are better training facilities available. He might have played age groups for Ireland, but success in that doesn't necessarily mean a player is destined for success at senior level. The likelihood of Ireland playing Test cricket in the near future is pretty slim for various reasons (and I'm not saying this is correct), so Rankin has presumably considered this and taken the opportunity to represent England, which he's absolutely entitled to do.

I don't think England selection policy is ideal either but it's not a conscious effort on the part of England selectors to pick overseas-born players, or to ruin Associate nations. The job of the England selectors is to select the best side available to them (in this case, without selecting Test regulars) and Ballance - who's recognised by most people are one of the best prospects on the county circuit - and Rankin are in it because rightly or wrongly, they believe them to be good enough and deserving of a place in the team.

[jaybro]

England are poachers plain and simple the fact they can hold players to ransome by forceing them to choose Kolpak deals ( County Cricket ) over representing their home nations then saying " Hey you can play for England " is bulls%*# I understand England much like Australia is a Multi-cultural Country and will have players with foreign background but players who have represented other nations in U19's, 1st class cricket and even full ODI's playing for the Pom's really doesn't sit well with me

[Contra]

England are poachers plain and simple the fact they can hold players to ransome by forceing them to choose Kolpak deals ( County Cricket ) over representing their home nations then saying " Hey you can play for England " is bulls%*# I understand England much like Australia is a Multi-cultural Country and will have players with foreign background but players who have represented other nations in U19's, 1st class cricket and even full ODI's playing for the Pom's really doesn't sit well with me

The Kolpak ruling is a European Court of Justice ruling, so it would actually be illegal for their right to work (or play cricket in this case) to be denied on the basis of nationality if they're a holder of an EU passport. If a player is a Kolpak it doesn't mean he's qualified for England. So what the Kolpak ruling means is that players who hold EU passports can be paid to play cricket in England, where there are more opportunities because there are more professional clubs and the season takes place during most off seasons. So nobody's being forced, nobody's being held to ransom and nobody is being poached - it's a question of being paid to play cricket rather than not paid to play cricket. If you want to talk about countries who field players born outside of them, have a go at New Zealand while you're at it. And Zimbabwe, actually.

The total lack of knowledge or forethought before people pass judgement and comment on this really doesn't sit well with me.