Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

westoelad wrote:Yes, uncontested toss rule has been scrapped.
https://www.wisden.com/stories/county-c ... ampionship

Excellent! I see Behardien was playing today in South Africa...out for 8 hit wicket!

westoelad wrote:Yes, uncontested toss rule has been scrapped.
https://www.wisden.com/stories/county-c ... ampionship

Excellent! I see Behardien was playing today - out for 8...hit wicket.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/880 ... up-2019-20

Saving himself.
N. Echo reports mentions both joining forpre-season tour in March
Season not long away and, all of a sudden, can't wait for it to start.

From The Sunday Times.

On the domestic front, Kolpak players will not be allowed to play county cricket after the end of this year as a result of the UK’s exit from the European Union. The ECB has issued guidance to the 18 first-class counties informing them that they will only be able to employ Kolpak cricketers as overseas players in 2021, regardless of whether they are in the middle of a multi-year deal.

I'm not sure I understand this. In our case Behardien has signed a two year deal so would it mean he'd have to be the one overseas player next year? I must be misunderstanding because what would happen if a county had two or more Kolpak players? They surely couldn't just cancel contracts.

captaincolly wrote: what would happen if a county had two or more Kolpak players? They surely couldn't just cancel contracts.

it might just be a case of nobody knowing what will happen. Poor old Surrey... they've got about 10 and half of them are probably paid by Saracens

If counties have contracts with players, I'd have thought they'd be in a position to challenge these things in the courts. What is for certain... two kolpaks in the hand will give more possibilities than none in the bush

what happens with Carse and Harte?

I'm not even sure that they are here under the kolpak rule anyway

Durhamfootman wrote:what happens with Carse and Harte?

I'm not even sure that they are here under the kolpak rule anyway

https://www.cricketworld.com/sam-hain-t ... /61635.htm
Carse is playing for the England Lions so must be eligible for the full national side. Not sure abour Harte but I don't think he's a Kolpak.
I'm sure you're right about things being up in the air- if most Kolpaks were going to be ineligible next year or have to count as overseas then there would not have bern the recent spate of signings.
Philander the most high profile one and surely Somerset wouldn't have signed him if it meant he'd have to count am overseas player for the last two years of the deal. And equally why would any player sign a contract that could be rescinded. Unless they're planning to overhaul the overseas rules and allow more than one per team or something.

I confess to never having had a problem with the old 2 OS player rule

Durhamfootman wrote:I confess to never having had a problem with the old 2 OS player rule

Me neither.

Kolpak, or Cotonou agreement to give it's correct name expires in June 2020 anyway.Behardien qualified on an " ancestral "visa.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id ... -explained
I've always thought a sensible overseas rule would be 1 per county plus an extra one for each player that the developing county has lost to a central contract. That would focus counties on developing their academies. Taxi for Hampshire!

westoelad wrote:Kolpak, or Cotonou agreement to give it's correct name expires in June 2020 anyway.Behardien qualified on an " ancestral "visa.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id ... -explained
I've always thought a sensible overseas rule would be 1 per county plus an extra one for each player that the developing county has lost to a central contract. That would focus counties on developing their academies. Taxi for Hampshire!

That's a good idea!

captaincolly wrote:

westoelad wrote:Kolpak, or Cotonou agreement to give it's correct name expires in June 2020 anyway.Behardien qualified on an " ancestral "visa.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id ... -explained
I've always thought a sensible overseas rule would be 1 per county plus an extra one for each player that the developing county has lost to a central contract. That would focus counties on developing their academies. Taxi for Hampshire!

That's a good idea!

Yes, a really good idea. The national team benefits, and the county side doesn't miss out through losing players to England. Give that man a job with the ECB! Actually, on second thoughts he wouldn't fit in at all......

westoelad wrote:Kolpak, or Cotonou agreement to give it's correct name expires in June 2020 anyway.Behardien qualified on an " ancestral "visa.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id ... -explained
I've always thought a sensible overseas rule would be 1 per county plus an extra one for each player that the developing county has lost to a central contract. That would focus counties on developing their academies. Taxi for Hampshire!

from the beeb website

Neither will count as an overseas player as Behardien has ended his international career to take advantage of the Kolpak ruling, which is still in place for now despite the Britain's departure from the European Union, and Bedingham has a UK visa through a member of his family.

Yes, got them mixed up. Should have realised by name, Bedingham would seem the most likely to have British ancestry. He's also rated as the most promising w/k in South Africa. Don't know where that leaves your ex-Irish mate with 3 w/is in the likely 1st team.

westoelad wrote:Yes, got them mixed up. Should have realised by name, Bedingham would seem the most likely to have British ancestry. He's also rated as the most promising w/k in South Africa. Don't know where that leaves your ex-Irish mate with 3 w/is in the likely 1st team.

Might have to play Poynter as a specialist batsman.