Zimbabwe Team Discussion

What's the reason for Kolpak players being unable to play for Zimbabwe - is it a decision of theirs to try and keep players in Zimbabwe? If so that makes sense although one would question whether its a positive considering that the two first class seasons oppose each other. There's nothing in Kolpak that says that you can't play international sports while having a contract for another team...

Its funny whenever something like this happens when you see people shouting about how "the ECB/ICC should abolish Kolpak!!" or some nonsense when its something that you'd literally have to leave the EU over -origins are in a Slovenian handball player that was removed from their German team in the late 90s before Slovenia joined the EU because they'd reached their quota of non-EU players; the ruling states that the same rights given to EU players from Bosman should be accorded to people from nations that the EU has a Association agreement or something similar with. Its the same reason why players from [the Republic of] Ireland or the Netherlands can play County cricket in England whilst being counted as domestic players - since the rules are that you have to treat EU nationals as domestic players so you can't discriminate against them.
 
Its the same reason why players from [the Republic of] Ireland or the Netherlands can play County cricket in England whilst being counted as domestic players - since the rules are that you have to treat EU nationals as domestic players so you can't discriminate against them.

Which makes the whole Boyd Rankin thing odd as he was essentially told by Warwickshire he had to be available for England or they wouldn't renew his contract. (I think because this way they get extra money for him from the ECB for producing an England-qualified player.)

Re the Kolpak thing, I am pretty sure that while it's legally unenforceable, the ECB and counties have an internal agreement that they will not employ as a Kolpak player someone who is active in international cricket. I think also the initial agreement was they hadn't played international cricket for at least a year, but that has fallen by the wayside.
 
Ah so its a gentlemens agreement rather than something more formal. It'll be interesting to see what would happen if you get an IPL style franchise league in England; since then I'd imagine you might see some people try to challenge that...

That makes sense; I'd imagine that counties get money for "developing" England-qualified players; which technically Rankin would have been.
 
Ah so its a gentlemens agreement rather than something more formal. It'll be interesting to see what would happen if you get an IPL style franchise league in England; since then I'd imagine you might see some people try to challenge that...

That makes sense; I'd imagine that counties get money for "developing" England-qualified players; which technically Rankin would have been.

yeah it's completely unenforceable, but equally I think counties survive on ECB handouts so they my not want to push them too hard.
 
Zimbabwe certainly haven't got the table to show the quality of their performances in this World Cup.

One measure that might do for Zimbabwe is net run rate, on the combined pools table (something I like using) Zimbabwe are 9th by net run rate, above England and Ireland who have more wins, and very close to the West Indies - though obviously the match against the UAE might blow that one out. Still - it shows that Zimbabwe did a very good job of being competitive, they might not have won, but they weren't thrashed - even against India and South Africa, where Ireland weren't even close.

It annoys me to no end that Zimbabwe will do so well here and still struggle immensely to get tours in the next four years, and likely need to have to prove their worth against the equally determined Associates and Bangladesh, just to even have the chance.

Rankings are such a terrible way of showing how well cricket teams have played, Zimbabwe get to leave this tournament with pride. Certainly a lot more than England do.
 
all zim games have been closer than the scorecards look and they have put a good fight in all matches, except for having the experience to finish or close games from winning situations
 
MattW, couldnt have said it better myself.

Dont really like Portefield but how he replied to the ICC on twitter was hilarious hahaha ![DOUBLEPOST=1426800293][/DOUBLEPOST]MattW, couldnt have said it better myself.

I dont like Porterfield too much but how he responded to the ICC on twitter was hilarious.
 
Isn't it always. He has to be the worst cricketer ever to play 150 ODIs, and he should never have been re-selected for the national team bowling right-arm slow-medium off two paces.

Whether or not Alistair Campbell is a racist has nothing to do with the contents of that report.
 
Isn't it always. He has to be the worst cricketer ever to play 150 ODIs, and he should never have been re-selected for the national team bowling right-arm slow-medium off two paces.

Whether or not Alistair Campbell is a racist has nothing to do with the contents of that report.
Prosper was actually a pretty good ODI bowler, he had a decent economy rate and was nicknamed "dots" but....he was chucking so I guess all of that is now irrelevant.

Nobody wants him in the side, I even doubt his team mates do. I wish he would just retire and make way for a Mumba, Jongwe or Nyumbu etc.

No support from Brendan Taylor either....

 
What do you guys think of Prince Masvaure? @SpitfiresKent his FC stats don't scream out potential but he's done very well for ZimA

He has been described as not working hard enough in the past, however he is in good form on flat pitches at the moment, so he should be given a spot in the test team against New Zealand.

I have not seen him bat yet, so I i don't know if his technique will hold up in a test match.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top