Angus Fraser: England players want to stay with their counties (11 October 1998)
THE finances and therefore the development of cricket are largely dependent on the performances of the England team
11-Oct-1998
11 October 1998
Angus Fraser: England players want to stay with their counties
By Angus Fraser
THE finances and therefore the development of cricket are largely
dependent on the performances of the England team. Our
international players must be prepared properly both on and off
the field if they are to compete successfully at the highest
level.
This review group will make proposals to enhance the current
method of contracting/employing international players.
THIS HAS been the 'mission statement' for the 'Contracting of
England Players Review Group' which I have sat on this summer and
it has been our aim to examine the current system and from these
results make recommendations.
My role within all this, following the invitation of our chairman
Donald Trangmar, was to collect the views of the England players
on this subject. This I did along with obtaining the opinions of
several former England players still playing as well as a couple
of county coaches and cricketers whose views I have come to
respect over the years even if they have not played for England.
The first and most important response I received from the
overwhelming majority was that the current set-up is not
satisfactory and needs changing. It was felt that the demands,
both physically and mentally, on England players were too great
for them to be able to perform at the highest level each time
they walk out to play for England. England players in an English
summer are forced to play too much cricket and the amount of
cricket they play needs to be controlled.
As for what structure should be put into place, four alternatives
were given which were, in order of popularity among the players:
1. We keep the current system but give the England Selection
Committee the power to withdraw players from county matches when
they so wish and do with them as they wish.
2. Players have contracts with both their counties and the ECB.
The amount of cricket the players play, however, is controlled by
the ECB, ie the England Selection Committee.
3. England players are pulled out of counties and contracted
solely to the ECB. Their cricket, fitness, practice etc is
controlled by the ECB.
4. We stay as we are, with the counties controlling the players
and the England Selection Committee having to ask them if they
would be prepared to rest a player or not.
From this you can gather the majority of the players wish to
remain in contact with or under contract to their counties. They
are not the money grabbing, let's go to the highest bidder sort
of characters that some counties would have you believe. The
players do care for their counties and it is a relationship they
enjoy, one they feel offers them greater security.
The players enjoy the fact that if the England 'thing' does not
work out there is still someone out there who is willing to
employ them. By taking them out of the system players feel a
county may bring in someone specifically to replace them and when
the player's 'England contract' finishes the county may not want
him back.
Playing cricket for England is a lifetime's ambition and
something you want to do for a long time but it is also something
of a bonus, the icing on the cake, not something many, if any,
can look at with any real certainty. One player told me, and I am
sure he speaks for a few, that his mortgage is based on his
county salary, not his England wages.
Now this may give you a feeling that insecurity exists in an
England dressing room and, to a certain extent, it does but you
cannot blame the players for that, considering the way they have
been in and out of sides in the past.
The players also expressed reservations at the risks involved in
turning down a three, four or five year contract with their
county for a one or two-year deal with England even accepting
that a financial equilibrium would be maintained. Buying a player
out of a five-year deal, with the possibility of a benefit being
awarded at the end of it, could cost the ECB in excess of
£500,000.
Other views were raised concerning the registration and contested
player rules that currently exist and how they would need to be
altered so that the counties who supply three or four
international players are not unfairly weakened.
Compensation was also mentioned and the fact that if, say, Alec
Stewart missed 60 per cent of Surrey cricket due to England
commitments they would receive 60 per cent of his salary back in
compensation. As you can see we have had our hands full but it
has been our task to try and amend some of, if not all, of these
problems as well as many other findings raised by the review
group.
We hope the recommendations that are made this week will be
accepted by the First-Class Forum.
Source :: Electronic Telegraph (https://www.telegraph.co.uk)