Beyond the Boundary!

Comment from Rich B
Time: May 9, 2008, 10:54 pm

I can see why BVI might want to set out on their own. Players might still be allowed to play in the Carib Beer and KFC cups if good enough, and will certainly continue in the Stanford Twenty20. But now they would get to play for their country on a fairly regular basis (they performed as well as Bermuda, Caymans and Bahamas in the Stanford comp so they’ve every chance of entering the WCL leagues.

In light of BVI’s decision, and also other places like Jersey and even Wales, perhaps the ICC could do with changing its policy on player eligibility. We could do with more competitive teams for ODIs and 20/20 matches but it’s unlikely anyone will make the jump up to test level for many years.

Why not loosen regulations so that players from Caymans, T&C, Bahamas, Bermuda (and now BVI) can play for the Windies in tests, but play for their respective countries in ODIs and 20/20 matches. The same goes for the British Isles – Ed Joyce can play for England in tests (and make his career that way) but plays for Ireland at other times (plus anyone from Jersey, Guernsey, Isle of Man, Scotland).

This might be a good route for Wales to break away too – they’ll probably never play Tests but they might give England a good go over 50 overs.

Comment from Andrew Nixon
Time: May 10, 2008, 12:21 am

Rich - I have to say that I couldn’t possibly consider that a good idea. Players being able to switch countries is bad enough, but playing for two at the same time is just crazy. It also perpetuates the ludicrous notion that these countries are never going to be able to step up to Test status.

Comment from alistair gordon
Time: May 10, 2008, 8:24 am

I thought that Seychelles and Dominican Republic would also be applying but maybe not this year?

Comment from Ian MacQuillin
Time: May 10, 2008, 9:04 am

I agree with Rich; we need a bit of lateral thinking here.

Tests and ODIs are such different versions of the same sport – and there’s an even greater gap between tests and 20:20s – with different rules and playing regulations that there is a case for treating the eligibility criteria as differently as the playing criteria are considered.

Any player would be able to represent Ireland at rugby and England at cricket. I might be wrong, but I don’t think there’s anything to stop a player representing different countries concurrently in rugby union and rugby league. So why represent Ireland at ODI cricket and England at Test cricket?

This also makes sense because Ed Joyce, to use the example already given, CANNOT currently play tests for Ireland. But is able to play ODIs and 20:20s for Ireland. If Ireland ever get Test status, then any Irish players playing for other countries at test level would be able to choose to go back to Ireland or stay with their current team, in much the same way John Traicos represented both South Africa and Zimbabwe.

Cricket is in the process of massive change with the IPL redefining national loyalties and affiliations. The player eligibility rules need to follow what’s happening and adapt to the situation from the bottom up rather than attempt to set top down rules.

Dual eligibility might very well be totally unworkable, but it’s still worth a closer look. It’s no more a ridiculous idea than the IPL would have seemed a couple of years ago - I mean, who’d have thought then that cricketers would have even considered foregoing the chance to play for their countries in test match so they could turn out for an Indian franchise in a 20:20?

BTW, here’s a question: Who played cricket for England and football for Scotland?

I’ll post the answer later today if no-one come up with it.

Comment from Chris
Time: May 11, 2008, 2:49 am

I don’t see how BVI players could still play in the Carib Beer and KFC competitions. They would still play in the Stanford 2020 ust like Bahamas and Bermuda but that’s about it because they wouldn’t be able to qualify for the Leewards Islands team anymore.

Still don’t think it makes much sense. I wouldn’t hold my breath in anticipation of any of the teams from micro-countries making anything more than a flash in the pan like Bermuda. None of them have done it in any relevant team sport other than the Pacific trio of Samoa, Fiji and Tonga in rugby (and even there they’re quickly becoming nobodies with the advent of professionalism). I remember reading about how one of those countries (American Samoa I think) got hammered 30+ to nothing by Australia in a football qualifier. I thought they were talking about rugby because I never believed a soccer score like that could come about in a FIFA match unless the goalie got a red card.

I don’t think allowing players to play for two countries at once is a good idea either. T20 and Tests are different beasts, but they are not like rugby union and rugby league. The ICC oversees Tests, ODI and T20s whereas rugby union and rugby league are run by totally different bodies that have no association with each other apart from sharing the word “rugby” in their names. The IRB (rugby union) and RLIF (rugby league) set up their own rules that don’t take each other into account. The only way that can happen with cricket is if the ICC voluntarily decides to set up a separate and completely independent T20 govering body (it will a very cold day in hell when that occurs) or if a rebel body sets itself up as the governing body for T20 (maybe FICA could do that, but it still seems unlikely).

Comment from Chris
Time: May 11, 2008, 7:48 am

Actually, I just remembered something. Now Andrew, I could be wrong, but I don’t think the BVI is the first area to break away from the West Indies…in fact I don’t think the BVI or USVI are really a part of the West Indies to begin with. The reason I say that is because in the link you provided you note that the BVI is an [i]affiliate[/i] of the Leeward Islands board, but the Leeward Islands board is a full member of the West Indies (not simply affiliated with it), so the BVI therefore is an affiliate member of the West Indies. The reason I remember this was because I remember seeing an old copy of the Wisden Almanack (a few years back at least) and in the (small) section on associate/affiliate cricket there was a summary for Suriname written by Ram Hiralal (President of the Suriname Board if I remember rightly). In that section Hiralal talked a bit about the history of Surinamese cricket and about how Suriname was an affiliate of the West Indies before becoming an affiliate member of the ICC. That struck me as odd since I never heard of that before and I thought that if Suriname’s relationship with the West Indies was anything like Scotland’s with England before 1999 then surely Suriname would have competed in West Indian domestic competitions like Scotland did with England. So unless Wisden was mistaken or something happened in the translation from Dutch (if Hiralal even wrote in Dutch originally) then this “affiliate” status with regards to the West Indies must have been a sort of half-way-house between being a non-member of the ICC and being fully inside the ICC in some form. Have any Virgin Islanders ever played Test or ODI cricket? If not then I suspect that Virgin Islanders (British and US) may not even have been eligible for the West Indies at all, but only for the Leeward Islands only (and even then probably just barely). I wonder if there was a similar relationship between England and the Crown Dependencies or Scotland at any point…a halfway-house set up?

What the chances are for Guernsey and Vanuatu to gain associate status? Good luck to them.

By the way, the syndicated google ads are slowing down the page loading. It takes forever for the page to load on my computer now (often times I just give up and go elsewhere before trying again later). Any solutions or suggestions?

Comment from Andrew Nixon
Time: May 11, 2008, 8:32 am

I must confess that I’ve never heard of Suriname being part of the West Indies before. Virgin Islanders (from both British and US) are certainly eligible for the West Indies, though I’m not sure any of them have ever played. Some have played for the Leeward Islands recently though.

As for Guernsey and Vanuatu - Guernsey probably have more of a chance. They already meet the playing criteria of two wins over associates in the last two years (Gibraltar, Israel and France in the last European Championship Division Two) and the ICC were reportedly “impressed” on a visit to the island earlier this week. Vanuatu’s application is dependent on them mmeting the playing criteria in WCL Division Five.

I apologise for the Google Ads, they’re not my decision. Personally, I use Firefox with the AdBlock extension.