The associate's thread

[from_the_stands]

ICC World Cricket League Division 4 starts on the 3rd of September.

This eagerly awaited competition has finally kicked off in KL. Denmark, Malaysia, Nepal, Singapore, Tanzania and the United States will be chasing silverware, with the top 2 teams winning a place at the Division 3 champoionships, to be held in Bermuda next year. Waiting for them there will be; Uganda, Bermuda, Oman, and Italy.

The WCL rankings have the 6 teams ranked as follows;

25 - Denmark
26 - United States
27 - Nepal
28 - Tanzania
29 - Singapore
30 - Malaysia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Cricket_League

[dan08]

Day 1:

Denmark beat Tanzania by 88 runs.
USA beat Malaysia by 70 runs.
Nepal beat Singapore by 5 wickets.

Just noticed that the USA team has 10 players that were born abroad. They have just 1 local player. How's that fair on countries like Malaysia who play 8 locals? I think the ICC should create a rule where at least 6/7 players have to be born in the country that they are representing. It's stupid that they allow countries to have a team full of ex-pats.

[Dimi]

Day 1:

Denmark beat Tanzania by 88 runs.
USA beat Malaysia by 70 runs.
Nepal beat Singapore by 5 wickets.

Just noticed that the USA team has 10 players that were born abroad. They have just 1 local player. How's that fair on countries like Malaysia who play 8 locals? I think the ICC should create a rule where at least 6/7 players have to be born in the country that they are representing. It's stupid that they allow countries to have a team full of ex-pats.

One rule for one, one for another though - can't apply these rules to teams who let's face it wouldn't be able to compete without some ex-pats and then not apply them to say test sides.

[dan08]

Day 1:

Denmark beat Tanzania by 88 runs.
USA beat Malaysia by 70 runs.
Nepal beat Singapore by 5 wickets.

Just noticed that the USA team has 10 players that were born abroad. They have just 1 local player. How's that fair on countries like Malaysia who play 8 locals? I think the ICC should create a rule where at least 6/7 players have to be born in the country that they are representing. It's stupid that they allow countries to have a team full of ex-pats.

One rule for one, one for another though - can't apply these rules to teams who let's face it wouldn't be able to compete without some ex-pats and then not apply them to say test sides.

That rule would apply to all countries. I understand that countries need some ex-pats but i don't see the point in playing a whole team of them. The local youngsters aren't exactly going to improve if their spots are being taken up by ex-pats. If USA want more locals to play, which seems likely due to the new T20 league, then they aren't going the right away about it if they aren't going to give them a chance and instead play a load of ex-Jamaican cricketers.

Also, if teams only perform better with ex-pats then eventually all associate countries are going to start recruiting them and will end up with no native players.

[from_the_stands]

Day 1:

Denmark beat Tanzania by 88 runs.
USA beat Malaysia by 70 runs.
Nepal beat Singapore by 5 wickets.

Just noticed that the USA team has 10 players that were born abroad. They have just 1 local player. How's that fair on countries like Malaysia who play 8 locals? I think the ICC should create a rule where at least 6/7 players have to be born in the country that they are representing. It's stupid that they allow countries to have a team full of ex-pats.

One rule for one, one for another though - can't apply these rules to teams who let's face it wouldn't be able to compete without some ex-pats and then not apply them to say test sides.

That rule would apply to all countries. I understand that countries need some ex-pats but i don't see the point in playing a whole team of them. The local youngsters aren't exactly going to improve if their spots are being taken up by ex-pats. If USA want more locals to play, which seems likely due to the new T20 league, then they aren't going the right away about it if they aren't going to give them a chance and instead play a load of ex-Jamaican cricketers.

Also, if teams only perform better with ex-pats then eventually all associate countries are going to start recruiting them and will end up with no native players.

How many foreign born players have England used over the years?

[dan08]

Day 1:

Denmark beat Tanzania by 88 runs.
USA beat Malaysia by 70 runs.
Nepal beat Singapore by 5 wickets.

Just noticed that the USA team has 10 players that were born abroad. They have just 1 local player. How's that fair on countries like Malaysia who play 8 locals? I think the ICC should create a rule where at least 6/7 players have to be born in the country that they are representing. It's stupid that they allow countries to have a team full of ex-pats.

One rule for one, one for another though - can't apply these rules to teams who let's face it wouldn't be able to compete without some ex-pats and then not apply them to say test sides.

That rule would apply to all countries. I understand that countries need some ex-pats but i don't see the point in playing a whole team of them. The local youngsters aren't exactly going to improve if their spots are being taken up by ex-pats. If USA want more locals to play, which seems likely due to the new T20 league, then they aren't going the right away about it if they aren't going to give them a chance and instead play a load of ex-Jamaican cricketers.

Also, if teams only perform better with ex-pats then eventually all associate countries are going to start recruiting them and will end up with no native players.

How many foreign born players have England used over the years?

I don't think we've ever had more than 5 foreigners in the playing XI so that would be alright under my rule.

[from_the_stands]

How many foreign born players have England used over the years?

I don't think we've ever had more than 5 foreigners in the playing XI so that would be alright under my rule.[/quote]

Do you include players from Yorkshire in your foreign legion?

[from_the_stands]

Denmark and Nepal win their second matches and occupy the two top slots in div 4. Those two teams are my tip for promotion to div 3.

[dan08]

Day 2:

Denmark beat USA by 56 runs (D/L).
Singapore beat Malaysia by 112 runs (D/L). Definitely going back down to Division 5.
Nepal beat Tanzania by 8 wickets.

[OffStumpYorker]

How many foreign born players have England used over the years?

I don't think we've ever had more than 5 foreigners in the playing XI so that would be alright under my rule.

Do you include players from Yorkshire in your foreign legion?

The difficulty is that in the case of Players like Lumb, they were born abroad to English parents who where working in that country should that automatically disqualify them from playing for England?

What about Khawaja, Tahir? should the be prevented from playing international cricket because they live in a different country to where they were born.

[from_the_stands]

Craig McDermott has accepted the role as bowling coach for Ireland. I have to wonder why he didn't seem to last very long in the Oz role. A good result for Ireland.

[from_the_stands]

Nepal have crushed Malaysia in the WCL div 4 match to go top of the comp. These guys would have to be the best associate team not to have played in an ICC tournament. I reckon their turn will come.

[GGAS]

Just noticed that the USA team has 10 players that were born abroad. They have just 1 local player. How's that fair on countries like Malaysia who play 8 locals? I think the ICC should create a rule where at least 6/7 players have to be born in the country that they are representing. It's stupid that they allow countries to have a team full of ex-pats.

What if a person was born in say Jamaica, to two American parents? Would hardly be fair on them.

[dan08]

Just noticed that the USA team has 10 players that were born abroad. They have just 1 local player. How's that fair on countries like Malaysia who play 8 locals? I think the ICC should create a rule where at least 6/7 players have to be born in the country that they are representing. It's stupid that they allow countries to have a team full of ex-pats.

What if a person was born in say Jamaica, to two American parents? Would hardly be fair on them.

Maybe the being born abroad option would be unfair on some, possibly it could be that at least 6/7 players have to have been living in the country, that they are going to represent, before the age of 10. I think there has to be some rule in place because a team of ex-pats isn't acceptable.

[Chris de Burgh]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/ ... 5632.html#
Just found this article on Cricinfo dated 2006 on Cricket in China. From scratch the CCA set themselves the target of 20,000 players and 2,000 coaches by 2015. There were media outlets citing ambitions of becoming a test nation by 2020 and qualifying for the 2019 world cup but they've distanced themselves a bit from those. It'll be interesting to see how much progress that cricket can make in China in the next few years.