Comments on: Kolpaks: Good or Bad?

By: andruid

andruid — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:39:23 +0000

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.

By: splatthat

splatthat — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:19:54 +0000

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

By: cricindia

cricindia — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 22:42:15 +0000

how many kolpaks r allowed per county?

By: Â©hinaman

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.