Hoggard and Yorkshire

Top Contributors
hattrick

hattrick

Member
Hoggard and Yorkshire

I read this afternoon over the shocking treatment that Matthew Hoggard got from Yorkshire CCC. Suddenly a contract was no longer an option and he did not get a proper send off after playing his last fixture for them at the time.

What changed and why has he gotten this treatment from both the ECB and his home county. I understand that the game has become professional but really players are humans too and should at least some humane treatment.

Yorkshire angered by Hoggard's reaction to departure | England Cricket News | Cricinfo.com

I wonder what changed? His demands or the counties change in playing staff?

A bit baffled by this
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

yorkshire have alot of young bowlers coming through and hoggard hasn't been that much of a regular except for the 4 day team. They really don't seem to show the loyalty you would expect though for a player that has given them his best years. They seemed to disown him after last season when he said he wasn't happy with the way he was being treated. He still is a useful bowler with the new ball though he has lost a little pace.
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

Whilst I understand why Yorkshire have done it (age, cost not to mention the new reward system that the ECB is bringing in for playing certain players) it's still a strange decision.

The guy was their top wicket taker last year and you'd have thought they'd want his experience to help bring the younger seamers through. The guy has pretty much done it all in the game and must have a wealth of knowledge to pass on.

Ok, so he's lost some pace but that isn't the most important thing the first class game, movement is the biggest wicket taker as the skill levels are lower. He can still move the ball, has good control and I still reckon he can do a job.

Which ever county he ends up at will get a solid performer capable of taking 45 plus wickets.
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

Reward system is this inline with some sort of salary capping. Would love know more about it. I agree with whatever county will get him will get someone that would like to make a point.

It seems by accounts that the parties have different views on the situation. I also find it interesting that Yorkshire claim that he went public with it. I see some similarities between this and the John Crawley (Lancs and Hampshire) situation.
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

Reward system is being introduced in order to reduce the impact of the Kolpak.

The aim is to increase the number of English qualified players in each starting XI, with extra money being given for having players at certain age brackets. All of this will be linked to the existing central funding provided by the ECB.
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

Can you direct me via a link to this , I searched for it but could not find anything related. I think it is a great idea and should ensure that more South Africans play here than in England.
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

there is also this that outlines the structure for the 2010 county season

ECB unveils 2010 format - Media Releases - About ECB - ECB - ECB

the main thing has been the rewording of overseas players, its now going to be non-english qualified players, which means kolpaks should be a thing of the past as only one non english player will be allowed normally(or 2 for 20-20). This is in addition to what mas mentioned with counties being rewarded(£££) for playing younger players. On the whole its a very good idea though it may weaken some teams, northamptonshire for example who have over half their team as kolpaks currently.
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

Pretty stupid idea IMO to encourage teams to just play kids, if the guy isn't good enough to get into the state team on merit then how is playing him going to help him 'develop'?
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

It's not always a question of whether they are good enough as much as whether the clubs can afford to play them ahead of Kolpak players on big contracts. Teams aren't going to throw the money away and would often rather play a poorly performing player to justify the amount spent on them.

Having their funding adjusted accordingly should mean that decision is made more difficult as there is no a closer trade off between the two.

The age ranges listed are not going to change the usual make up of a side as most clubs will have a mix from 19 - 35 anyway. If they were insisting on playing 16/17/18 year olds, yes, it would be an issue but they're not. The aim is to increase the number of English qualifed players within the confines of existing employment law with regards to constraint of trade etc.

Also, the age ranges listed have to be there else it's pointless - no good in specifying that the team must contain four 28-32 year olds as they will ultimately have a more limited international lifespan. This system gives the talented players time to develop whilst also giving them a chance of a 7-12 year international career if good enough.
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

LIONS then DAYLIGHT;370575 said:
Pretty stupid idea IMO to encourage teams to just play kids, if the guy isn't good enough to get into the state team on merit then how is playing him going to help him 'develop'?
Click to expand...

I think that young players, and older english players probably are good enough to play in the county championship but are having their paths blocked by proven players with experience in south africa.

Young players in England aren't picked willy nilly and are probably worth their salt. Furthermore, players generaly do improve if they get match experience.

No offence LtD but not everything/one in the English Cricket system is necessarily bad. I understand pom bashing is a national pastime down here, but sometimes its unwarranted. The new system will introduce more and more english players into circulation who could blossom, if given the time and experience in first class cricket, into genuine test players.
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

@TeeJay1860

Mate slow down a tad there I do not like South African bashing as we are not the only ones guilty when county cricket is involved. I have 2 possible ideas what you are implying and feel free to comment on my interpretation.

One South African born players move over to England due to them holding duel citizenship. They will then qualify to play for England in years to come. Yes politics are involved in certain cases ie. Kevin Pietersen and sometimes not like in the case of Jonathan Trott and Craig Kieswetter. I happen to know that Kieswetter wanted a full Franchise contract after playing for South African under19. The norm is that they receive Rookie contracts and he and his family thought he deserved better and then moved to Somerset CCC. Also there is another player which might feature for England in the future and that is Pieter Malan(Middlesex CCC).

Players playing on Kolpak status is another issue and there are multiple nations involved an not just South Africa.

1. Australia -> players like Stuart Law, Ian Harvey played as Kolpak players for Lancashire and Durham / Derbyshire.
2. New Zealand -> players like Lou Vincent, Craig Spearman played for Lancashire and Gloucestershire respectively.
3. West Indies -> Pedro Collins ,Corey Colleymore played as well. Can remember the counties :)
4. Italy -> Joe Scuderi (yes Italy ..)

And then we have South Africa with Dale Benkenstein (Durham), Nicky Boje and Andrew Hall(Northants), Robin Pietersen(Derbyshire).

The point that I am trying to make is that the counties have employed multiple nations and I think it is unfair that you only mention South Africa as the main culprit. I agree with you that these internationals have benefited the level of the Championship in my opinion.
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

What is the definition of a Kolpak player?

(I thought they were being fazed out)
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

Kolpak came into force in 2003 when the European Court of Justice ruled that anyone with a work permit from a country which has an associate trading agreement with the EU had the same rights as a European worker. This means that county clubs can sign cricketers from around 100 countries, including South Africa and Zimbabwe, without having to designate them as overseas players as long as they have not represented their country in the past year. Kolpak players then only need a working holiday visa to play.

From the Guardian

The Kolpak rule explained | Sport | The Guardian
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

hattrick;386578 said:
@TeeJay1860

Mate slow down a tad there I do not like South African bashing as we are not the only ones guilty when county cricket is involved. I have 2 possible ideas what you are implying and feel free to comment on my interpretation.

One South African born players move over to England due to them holding duel citizenship. They will then qualify to play for England in years to come. Yes politics are involved in certain cases ie. Kevin Pietersen and sometimes not like in the case of Jonathan Trott and Craig Kieswetter. I happen to know that Kieswetter wanted a full Franchise contract after playing for South African under19. The norm is that they receive Rookie contracts and he and his family thought he deserved better and then moved to Somerset CCC. Also there is another player which might feature for England in the future and that is Pieter Malan(Middlesex CCC).

Players playing on Kolpak status is another issue and there are multiple nations involved an not just South Africa.

1. Australia -> players like Stuart Law, Ian Harvey played as Kolpak players for Lancashire and Durham / Derbyshire.
2. New Zealand -> players like Lou Vincent, Craig Spearman played for Lancashire and Gloucestershire respectively.
3. West Indies -> Pedro Collins ,Corey Colleymore played as well. Can remember the counties :)
4. Italy -> Joe Scuderi (yes Italy ..)

And then we have South Africa with Dale Benkenstein (Durham), Nicky Boje and Andrew Hall(Northants), Robin Pietersen(Derbyshire).

The point that I am trying to make is that the counties have employed multiple nations and I think it is unfair that you only mention South Africa as the main culprit. I agree with you that these internationals have benefited the level of the Championship in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Sorry mate, the Saffa bashing wasnt intentional,

It might have just been my ignorance, but i assumed that aussie, kiwi and windies players were the standard overseas players, where only 1 (or is it 2) were allowed to play in a game - like Kaneria and Warne do/did for Essex/Hampshire. so i apologise for that mistake - the South African connection was simply the one i could recall - i think one county team once played a game with 6 or 7 south african kolpaks

fully agree with you on the trott/kieswetter issue, and thats not something i have an issue with, or SA in general. I would just like to see more and more english players (single or dual nationals like Trott, KP, Kieswetter) coming through the system who could be the next Bothams/Truemans/Goochs, as opposed to flooding the league with, albeit talented, players from several other countries who cant represent England.

Sorry bout the confusion Hattrick, never meant to cause offence
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

@TeeJay1860

The team you refer to is Leicestershire CCC and I agree with you, English cricket should be benefiting English Cricket. The biggest problem is that the Pound/Rand exchange rate does tend to make South African players a nice addition. Keep one thing in mind and that is when the player signs a Kolpak deal he has to play as an overseas professional if he plays again in South Africa.

I think Geoff Miller and the ECB will ensure that this is monitored and as mas cambios indicated, funding will be used a controlling factor.

Import duty: As England call up yet another South African in Craig Kieswetter, Geoff Miller admits we could be close to the limit | Mail Online

Sport - Error
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

Similar to McLaren did recently for SA right?
I understand that financially its beneficial for the clubs - and thats probably one of the reasons i hate english football so much! Arsenal fielded a team of 10 overseas players (walcott the only englishman) and they still play in the English premier league.

please no-one misread this, im not a BNP voter or some fanatical xenophobe, i just see clubs as selfish institutions who arent there to foster players who can represent their country, just their own success. I'd rather it were a balance between the two - its unfortunatley one of the things that lalit modi has got right - a number of U-24(am i right), a number of older indians and a small number of overseas, that way you get continuous growth of talent, nurtured by some of the best players in the world, both english and from other countries
 
Re: Hoggard and Yorkshire

Indeed .. McLaren felt he got a raw deal and signed a Kolpak deal with Kent. The thing is that these players make a fair buck (keep in mind the exchange rate is about 1 pound to 11-15 Rand). I think the players are after the security that this money brings them. South African cricket I believe lost out on a player that moved one and is scoring heavily here and in England ->Jacques Rudolph.

Also keep in mind that all of these counties are run as businesses and if you can buy success and access into Champions League, winning the championship then spending money on these Kolpaks makes sense to a degree.

Just this week Neil McKenzie signed with Hampshire so the show goes on...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top