Sport Today

Not about Ind series but abt what Neil Manthorp writes at

http://www.supercricket.co.za/default.asp?id=3324&des=sportstalk

Can't get to it. What's the crux of the biscuit?

yeah right, u can get all those minky urls though, but they r yummy
cakes, not salt biscuits like this

+++++++++++++ Untimely departures loom  by Neil Manthorp

The best part about the forthcoming tour of India, perhaps, is the
distraction it will create from the disturbing news bubbling out of
England at the moment.
A couple of weeks ago I was told that as many as 30 South African
cricketers were touting for business on the English county circuit for
the 2005 season.

Naturally I beleived it to be typical English media hyperbole. Claude
Henderson's desperately sad departure from SA cricket had, indeed,
opened doors for SA cricketers to ply their trade as "locals" in the
most lucrative market in the game.

Their 'escape' is provided by the Kolpak agreement. For those who
aren't familiar with how that works, it's a political 'thing' that
says sportsmen should be allowed to work in different countries just
as freely as tradesmen are allowed to sell fruit, cars and gold.

Disillusioned white cricketers who feel they are unfairly prejudiced
by South Africa's desire to redress the imbalances and injustices of
the past are a commodity we know. Former Natalian Kevin Pieterson
broke new records for whining and whingeing when he left four years
ago. Couldn't handle the new South Africa, we said. Fine.***off
then.

So when I heard about the new list of 30 I thought we might be
entering a new era of 'clear out the dead wood and let the new
generation come through.' In fact, I thought it might be very good
news.

I called a few of the senior (white) players in the country to
discover whether there was any truth in the rumours. Had they been
approached by counties to forsake their right to play for their
country to play county cricket instead? Yes, they had. Many of them.

Then I called a county or two, just to check. Had they been
approaching South African cricketers? No, they hadn't. The cricketers
had been approaching them, albeit through their agents.

One county was prepared to read me a list of cricketers available for
service to English counties. It was an international agent so there
were West Indians, Indians, New Zealanders and Australians on his list
- and 12 South Africans.

I have no desire to cause a stampede of recrimination and anger, hence
I mention no names, but amongst those 12 names there were eight SA
internationals, several current.

And three of them were black.

So it's not a racial thing, ladies and gentlemen. We may not have the
infrastructure (right now) to compete with the money offered by
England, but we could do a lot better. An honest evaluation of where
the money from our loyal sponsors is actually spent would be a great
start. How much, if any, actually reaches the players?

To an English county an annual fee (for six months work) of 45,000
pounds is seen as a bargain. For a South African cricketer, even a
Test player, that means almost two million rand - with bonuses - for a
three year contract.

We have a very large problem and it is fast approaching. I desperately
hope our leaders are aware of it and have a plan. It's important that
we all know that.

+++++++

 >

The article seems to suggest this is a disaster, but I don't
understand why. Many other countries have cricketers who engage
in business (whether they tout for it or not) on the English
county circuit, and leave to play international matches when needed.

tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

players in the country to discover whether there was any truth in the
rumours. Had they been approached by counties to forsake their right
to play for their country to play county cricket instead? Yes, they
had. Many of them."

That would imply that this is a different phenomenon, whereby those
taking up lucrative county contracts turn their backs on the uncertain
prospects of an international career.

Which might be a bit of a disaster, both for RSA and England.

Cheers

Mike

Can't keep markets down for too long. If RSA can't pay its
players as much as the English clubs can, it's better to have the
player play for English clubs than for RSA. Perhaps RSA (or the
ICC) should re-think their scheduling of international fixtures.
Alternatively, if RSA can pay the players as much, it will just
result in higher wages for the players.

There are certainly scenarios under which something like this
would be harmful all around. E.g., if clubs promise to pay
players huge amounts of money, and then go bankrupt and default.
Is this likely to happen?

In the long run, the Packer revolution was good for the game.
Something like this can also be have a positive effect. The ICC
and/or diffferent countries will have to rationalize the
financial structure of the sport.

tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

It may be better for the English clubs, but it's not so good for
England. Which is partly why they're about to institute differential
shares of the ECB handout, with the clubs who produce England players
getting bigger shares.

Yes, well, in the long run, we'll all be dead.

Cheers,

Mike

Does that apply to prize money from tournaments as well? I've
followed the county game only sporadically these last few years.
What proportion of a county's revenues is represented by the ECB
handout? Ticket sales and local sponsorships will likely increase
if a county signs a few star players, be they domestic or
foreign. It'll improve the odds of winning a tournament, which
increases ticket revenue as well. If the ECB handout does go
down, there will be some tradeoff between the cost of that and
the benefits of the other factors.

Most certainly. Fortunately, we won't have to wait anywhere near
that long for the long run benefits of changes to the structure
of cricket to be evident.

I think he's laying it on a bit thick. And sorry to say I'm no longer
surprised. Manthorp is one of a number of cricket reporters in SA
whose stock in trade is alarm, doom and gloom.

First some numbers: Last season the inter-provincial FC and List A
competitions were played out between 11 sides who were allowed to
contract 16 players over and above those players contracted to the
UCB. This season the squads are bigger (18) but there are just 6 new
franchises playing at top level. The old provinces live on and play at
a slightly lower level, but they may only field 4 professional players
in any one game. As any fule kno, that there are less jobs available
for cricketers in SA.

Early in the season when the UCB contracted players were all at home,
it was tough for some players. Derek Crookes couldn't get a FC game.
Nor, on a regular basis, could Justin Kemp. Several provinces have
retained an experienced man as the captain (Ackerman at the Lions,
Cullinan at the Titans) and all of them have elected to retain some
old hands. There must be a couple of good, young players feeling left
out in the cold and wondering how they're going to make enough money.

Manthorp must know all of this.

It doesn't help either that the selectors seem to favour a revolving
door policy. Look at Albie Morkel (one of the players known to be
seeking employ in the UK and, reportedly, to have secured it). Gets
picked for two difficult tours, performs impressively for SA 'A'
against NZ 'A' and then gets dropped.

Langeveldt gets called up as a replacement, gets shoved straight into
the playing side ahead of other players already in the party, does
tolerably well, looks one of our better bowlers in England, heads the
FC averages, gets dropped and then gets picked to replace the only
specialist spin bowler in the squad! Only trouble is Langeveldgt was
himself injured and had to stand down. So they replace him with a spin
bowler who should have gone in the first place...

1999 Smith is carving out a reputation for himself but gets left out
of the CWC squad. Gary Kirsten, more experienced but also older,
slower, less mobile in the field, gets picked. When Jonty Rhodes -
middle order bat and specialist point fielder - gets injured they
replace him with Smith. You might say that justice has prevailed, but
now the squad is unbalanced and they shuffle the excess top order
batsmen around to try to bolster the unreliable middle order.

Nearly every season we see strange selectorial dances. Sure there's
the quotas (though we're told they're no longer in place for the
senior national side), but IMO it's harebrained thinking by the
selectors that is really confusing players and making the promising,
young player wonder if it's all worthwhile.

Plus, as Manthorp notes, there's the lure of stirling.

Add Kolpak into the mix and there is the potential for a problem, but
I think Manthorp overstates it and I think his article doesn't quite
add up. 30 becomes 12 fairly quickly. The players say they've been
approached by counties, the counties say that the players are making
the approaches - somebody's telling porkies and it's probably some
agent who will take a commission if he places a player and will lose
little if he doesn't.

Interestingly it seems that Smith, captain, sure of his place at least
in the short term (and there's no serious challenge to the throne),
better paid than most and contracted to the UCB, is one of the players
looking for work in the UK. Reportedly he has found it with Somerset,
along with Morkel.

I think he's laying it on a bit thick. And sorry to say I'm no longer
surprised. Manthorp is one of a number of cricket reporters in SA
whose stock in trade is alarm, doom and gloom.

First some numbers: Last season the inter-provincial FC and List A
competitions were played out between 11 sides who were allowed to
contract 16 players over and above those players contracted to the
UCB. This season the squads are bigger (18) but there are just 6 new
franchises playing at top level. The old provinces live on and play at
a slightly lower level, but they may only field 4 professional players
in any one game. As any fule kno, that there are less jobs available
for cricketers in SA.

Early in the season when the UCB contracted players were all at home,
it was tough for some players. Derek Crookes couldn't get a FC game.
Nor, on a regular basis, could Justin Kemp. Several provinces have
retained an experienced man as the captain (Ackerman at the Lions,
Cullinan at the Titans) and all of them have elected to retain some
old hands. There must be a couple of good, young players feeling left
out in the cold and wondering how they're going to make enough money.

Manthorp must know all of this.

It doesn't help either that the selectors seem to favour a revolving
door policy. Look at Albie Morkel (one of the players known to be
seeking employ in the UK and, reportedly, to have secured it). Gets
picked for two difficult tours, performs impressively for SA 'A'
against NZ 'A' and then gets dropped.

Langeveldt gets called up as a replacement, gets shoved straight into
the playing side ahead of other players already in the party, does
tolerably well, looks one of our better bowlers in England, heads the
FC averages, gets dropped and then gets picked to replace the only
specialist spin bowler in the squad! Only trouble is Langeveldgt was
himself injured and had to stand down. So they replace him with a spin
bowler who should have gone in the first place...

1999 Smith is carving out a reputation for himself but gets left out
of the CWC squad. Gary Kirsten, more experienced but also older,
slower, less mobile in the field, gets picked. When Jonty Rhodes -
middle order bat and specialist point fielder - gets injured they
replace him with Smith. You might say that justice has prevailed, but
now the squad is unbalanced and they shuffle the excess top order
batsmen around to try to bolster the unreliable middle order.

Nearly every season we see strange selectorial dances. Sure there's
the quotas (though we're told they're no longer in place for the
senior national side), but IMO it's harebrained thinking by the
selectors that is really confusing players and making the promising,
young player wonder if it's all worthwhile.

Plus, as Manthorp notes, there's the lure of stirling.

Add Kolpak into the mix and there is the potential for a problem, but
I think Manthorp overstates it and I think his article doesn't quite
add up. 30 becomes 12 fairly quickly. The players say they've been
approached by counties, the counties say that the players are making
the approaches - somebody's telling porkies and it's probably some
agent who will take a commission if he places a player and will lose
little if he doesn't.

Interestingly it seems that Smith, captain, sure of his place at least
in the short term (and there's no serious challenge to the throne),
better paid than most and contracted to the UCB, is one of the players
looking for work in the UK. Reportedly he has found it with Somerset,
along with Morkel.

tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

For most counties, it represents about two-thirds of the club's
revenue. For a county like Derbyshire with next to no members and who
have to resort to letting people with dogs come in free if they are to
attract the traditional midweek crowd of two men and a dog, it's more
like 90%.

True enough.

Speak for yourself. The way I'm feeling this morning, I'll be lucky to
last until the India v South Africa series.

Cheers,

Mike

They don't play county cricket in Scotland.

--
Cheers, ymt.