Kolpaks: Good or Bad?

In English domestic cricket there is a topic causing a lot of debate – the Kolpak rule which allows players from other countries – mainly South Africa – to play and not count as an overseas player due to an EU ruling.

An advantage of this rule is that many qualilty players can come in to England, which raises the standard of domestic cricket, making it better to watch for spectators. Another good thing is that with more quality and international plaers around, young players can learn and improve their game. Kolpaks are also good for the counties because they can improve the team, which can bring more money and trophies.

However, Kolpaks can also be a bad thing. If there are too many Kolpak players around this could stop the promising English players coming though and getting their chance. Because Kolpaks are often cheap and have more experience, some counties get them in for a quick fix rather than trying out the young players. Another downside is that some Kolpak players might not be fully commited to the county and just want to get more money in their close-season. Also, players that come to play for England, although benefiting the national team, can cause critisim from other countries because they weren’t brought up playing cricket in England.

Overall, I think Kolpak players are good, as long as there are not too many of them. As there is a law, so no way of stopping them coming, the ECB has a reward system for the amount of English players being played. I think it sould be a biggger reward/fine because if it was then counties would think more about playing the young English players than gambling around £20, 000 for the extra money they can gain from winning a trophy.

Technorati:    

Write a comment:


 

4 Comments to “Kolpaks: Good or Bad?”

  |   (In reverse chronology)

( feed for these comments)

 

Could it be that just maybe Kolpaks are the counties way of getting around policies on International players that are possibly over restrictive.
If perhaps counties were allowed 3 or 4 internationals in their whole squad then they would be less reason to have to turn to Kolpaks to fill in the gaps with Kolpaks while the young prodigies in the 2nd XIs perfect their game, and it would enable the counties a bigger pool of talent to pick from other than just the teams with special agreements with the EU, while also being less harmful to a potential international career for the guy who would have signed up as a Kolpak anyway.

andruid said this on April 11th, 2008 at 1:39 pm

There are no limits on how many Kolpaks per county, this would not be enforcable by laws.
Kolpak is actually the surname of a south african handball player who the rule was named after as he was the first man it was used upon

splatthat said this on November 19th, 2007 at 4:19 pm

how many kolpaks r allowed per county?

cricindia said this on November 10th, 2007 at 10:42 pm

Thanks Splatthat,
is Kolpak an acronym of something?
Is this a legislation for players from any foreign country, or just South Africa?

From the points you have raised, it seems it is very much like the GMC allowing overseas doctors to practice in UK. (Except there is no money reward for restricting the numbers).

Like any such issues, it is a matter of striking a right balance. There should be a restriction on the number of overseas players a team can field.

And I emphasise on the word ‘field’, in comparison to restriction on the number they can employ. That leaves room for flexibility without forgeting the responsibility to develop ‘home’ players.

©hinaman said this on November 10th, 2007 at 3:14 pm