Tribunal decision threatens overseas cricketers in club game

Participate in discussion with your fellow Zimbabwe cricket fans!
pariah
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:27 pm
Supports: Matabeleland Tuskers

Tribunal decision threatens overseas cricketers in club game

Post by pariah »

Tribunal decision threatens overseas cricketers in club game
George Dobell August 9, 2017

http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/con ... 15896.html
Frinton On Sea Cricket Club have lost a tribunal appeal after they were penalised for fielding an overseas player deemed to be ineligible in a ruling that could have far-reaching consequences for young cricketers hoping to mix travel by playing sport in different countries.

While Frinton's case against the Two Counties League might not, at first glance, appear significant outside the cricketing environment of Essex and Suffolk (it resulted in a points reduction for Frinton and the banning of a young, Australian cricketer), it could set a precedent that will change the organisation of recreational cricket across the UK.

The decision could have immediate repercussions for around 110 cricketers currently playing in leagues across the UK. Indeed, it is understood an investigation into another Australian player in the same league has already been opened.

The crux of the Frinton case found that Blake Reed, a 22-year-old Australian, should be considered a professional player as he had represented Western Australia at U19 level.

While the Western Australia Cricket Association provided evidence that he was no longer part of their system and Frinton provided evidence that he was not employed as a sportsman - he works as a labourer both in the UK and in Australia - the appeals tribunal concluded that he should be viewed as "an aspiring" player or coach and must therefore be viewed as a professional. As such, his Youth Mobility Visa, which specifically prohibits employment as a sportsperson, was viewed as insufficient to allow him to play or coach.

The Appeals Tribunal were swayed, in part, by the fact that Reed described himself as "an aspiring" player on the website cricketmentoring.com (a website offering 'a holistic approach' to coaching) and in part by the Home Office immigration rules.

These guidelines define "professional" in sporting terms as anyone who "is providing services as a sportsperson, playing or coaching in any capacity, at a professional or semi-professional level of sport; or being a person who currently derives, who has in the past derived or seeks in the future to derive, a living from playing or coaching, is providing services as a sportsperson or coach at any level of sport, unless they are doing so as an Amateur."

Most strikingly, the tribunal also quoted Home Office guidance which states: "A person may also be considered as "seeking to derive a living" if they have played as part of a player pathway. A player may be considered to be on a "Pathway" and therefore classified as a "Professional Sportsperson", if that person has played cricket above U17 at state/province/territory level (paid or unpaid) in any country."

That definition could potentially mean that a large body of young cricketers who have tried but failed to make the grade will be denied the opportunity to follow the long tradition of mixing social cricket with travel.

Taken to its logical conclusion, it means that any player with "aspirations" will be excluded from playing league cricket. While some will be eligible for a Tier 2 visa, they will have to have played a certain amount of international cricket to do so. A six-month holiday visa might also allow overseas cricketers to play in England, but they would be prohibited from being paid either for their cricket or any other form of work during their stay.

When Frinton were originally notified of action against them, they sought to take out an injunction on the TCL to compel them to allow Reed to play. But, after the Two Counties League management board - all of whom are volunteers - called a vote of confidence from the league over the matter, threatening to resign on block if they were defeated and expel Frinton if they were backed, the club and league agreed to the appeal process as a compromise. Both parties accepted its conclusions as final and binding.

As a result, it is not thought likely that Frinton will seek further legal action.

It is understood by ESPNcricinfo, however, that Reed is pursuing action against both the TCL and the Home Office. He claims the league breached their contract by first registering him - and thereby convincing him it was worth booking a flight to England - and then deeming him ineligible, while he maintains the Home Office have discriminated against him (and other non-UK players) by defining 'professional' in terms that he alleges differ depending on whether the individual is a UK citizen or not. Reed played in Somerset in 2016 without difficulty.

There may be some sympathy for both Reed and the management of the TCL. While Reed's plans for the season are clearly ruined, officials from the league have been dragged into a complex legal situation far beyond the remit of the day-to-day running of a cricket league.

Throughout the ruling their frustration at the Home Office's lack of clarity or leadership can be felt. At one stage they refer to the "weasel words" of the Home Office spokesman and point out that, although they have "failed to give the Appeal Tribunal any real assistance" they also issued "thinly-veiled threat to Mr Reed and Frinton" over the possibility of "enforcement action".

The ECB declined to confirm or deny whether they paid for the TCL's legal costs, but the league did utilise the ECB's retained lawyers, Onside Law.

The ECB told ESPNcricinfo: "We are aware of clubs and leagues' concerns regarding this issue and will be seeking further clarification and guidance from the Home Office."

ESPNcricinfo also understands that the Immigration Department of the Australian government has requested a copy of the judgement and is currently studying it. If they respond in a tit-for-tat manner there could be repercussions for dozens - if not hundreds - of 'aspiring' young cricketers who travel to play Grade cricket each English winter.

It was reported at the end of last year how Australian authorities had clamped down on visa requirements.

Ironically, while the justification for the Home Office (and perhaps the ECB) crackdown might be presented as a worthy intention to provide further opportunities to 'homegrown' young players, the result may well be to stifle long-available opportunities for many.

pariah
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:27 pm
Supports: Matabeleland Tuskers

Re: Tribunal decision threatens overseas cricketers in club game

Post by pariah »

Image

User avatar
watermelon
Posts: 344
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:46 am

Re: Tribunal decision threatens overseas cricketers in club game

Post by watermelon »

Too long didn't read.
Sounds like another colonialist having a whinge about something.
-watermelon
<3 Jemisi rules <3

Googly
Posts: 14197
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:48 pm

Re: Tribunal decision threatens overseas cricketers in club game

Post by Googly »

Ya a large number of English players head to the Southern Hemisphere to play their season. I'm not sure the ECB have thought this through. They need to lighten up, league cricket is a lot more interesting there with young Aussies, Saffers, New Zealanders etc in the sides. This only English and particularly only English born is gathering momentum over there. I watched a game last week that had to be stopped twice because of unbelievable sledging of a non English player in a club game. Now that their systems are producing quality players they think they don't need the rest of the world. It's a poor state of affairs.

pariah
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:27 pm
Supports: Matabeleland Tuskers

Re: Tribunal decision threatens overseas cricketers in club game

Post by pariah »

Jarivs, Taylor, Brexit, 5 years, 7 years etc. On the other hand, this article here is the danger.

Effectively, this business of u17s/u19s using systems in SA/ZIM then hoping to be professionals in England(players, coaches, sports management etc) be it at County or Club level is being cut off completely.

What it boils down to is a situation where any youngster now participating with no intention of continuing in Zimbabwe's domestic cricket in view of the ZIM national team, is effectively doing it for mere personal leisure or amusement considering their prospects outside are now either reduced or non-existent if they have no ancestral citizenship.

Junior national structures are strictly reserved to develop those expressly keen on a career in the sport. That is why even when there are several top youngsters in soccer, rugby, cricekt etc, you often see the same faces in u17, u19 to bring them up together.

Considering this tribunal, plus the track record of a number of former ZIM u17/19 players, this alone is enough for ZC(and CSA) to put in place certain selection regulations which cannot be defeated even in the fairest court. Of course it would affect all races in its application, but one more than the other for obvious reasons.

CSA has been moving faster than ZIM in formalising and legalising such things. In the recent Global T20 draft, players like Levi and Abbott missed out because CSA said Kolpak players will be treated as overseas players in drafts, so they were competing with the likes of Mitchell McClenaghan and Alex Hales. If Gary Balannce was Zimbabwean he probably would have made it. Sean Ervine was Zimbabwean but his poor bowling affected his chances.

Slowly but surely, in SA there'll be nowhere to hide. Overseas rugby players being culled from the Springboks. Kolpak cricketers being classified as overseas players, with strong proposals to block them from playing in the domestic competitions(Momentum ODI and Sunfoil Series). What is Zimbabwe Cricket doing? Dangling fat multi-year contracts to players about to retire! :roll: :cry:

A country like Germany for instance woul dhave long acted on juniors who use the system with no intention to participate in future.

Robbo
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 11:32 am
Supports: MidWest Rhinos

Re: Tribunal decision threatens overseas cricketers in club game

Post by Robbo »

This ruling will have far more impact on English club sides who bring in overseas players, including Zimbabweans, rather than at the top level.
For example, several clubs in the league I play in have had Zimbabweans as their overseas player, and it's been good for both club and player. Now however, if they have played ' first class ' cricket within the last 12 months, regardless of whether it's Sheffield Shield or the Logan Cup, they now have to apply for a sports type visa, which is much, much harder to obtain in terms of red tape and cost.

It's a bad ruling because player numbers here are dropping, and overseas players not only raise the standard, but really enhance the life of the club. Not only that, but players go back to their home country having experience of different conditions. It most cases, it is ( or was) a win-win.

foreignfield
Posts: 4944
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 9:39 am
Supports: Mountaineers

Re: Tribunal decision threatens overseas cricketers in club game

Post by foreignfield »

pariah wrote:
Thu Aug 31, 2017 10:23 am
A country like Germany for instance woul dhave long acted on juniors who use the system with no intention to participate in future.
Wrong. This is a free country, and if you have options in terms of what nation you can represent, the choice is yours. Coming up through the system binds you to nothing. There are a number of sports where you can switch your allegiance even after representing one country at senior level for years--I'm not aware of a single case where someone who wanted to make a switch had serious obstacles put in his path.

ljriley90
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 11:31 pm

Re: Tribunal decision threatens overseas cricketers in club game

Post by ljriley90 »

Robbo wrote:
Thu Aug 31, 2017 12:11 pm
This ruling will have far more impact on English club sides who bring in overseas players, including Zimbabweans, rather than at the top level.
For example, several clubs in the league I play in have had Zimbabweans as their overseas player, and it's been good for both club and player. Now however, if they have played ' first class ' cricket within the last 12 months, regardless of whether it's Sheffield Shield or the Logan Cup, they now have to apply for a sports type visa, which is much, much harder to obtain in terms of red tape and cost.

It's a bad ruling because player numbers here are dropping, and overseas players not only raise the standard, but really enhance the life of the club. Not only that, but players go back to their home country having experience of different conditions. It most cases, it is ( or was) a win-win.
The ruling is stricter than that.

Anyone who has ever played t20, List A or FC for a franchise or state however long ago is classed as a pro sportsman and will need a tier 5 visa to enter the UK. To qualify for the tier 5 they need to have played 5 FC game sin last 24 months.

User avatar
CrimsonAvenger
Posts: 9838
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 2:57 am
Supports: Mountaineers
Location: India

Re: Tribunal decision threatens overseas cricketers in club game

Post by CrimsonAvenger »

ljriley90 wrote:
Thu Aug 31, 2017 2:53 pm
Anyone who has ever played t20, List A or FC for a franchise or state however long ago is classed as a pro sportsman and will need a tier 5 visa to enter the UK. To qualify for the tier 5 they need to have played 5 FC game sin last 24 months.
So, that means the guys who played one or two games as fill ins - like Zhawi, Diplock, Bowie, etc. - are marooned from both ends of this rule?

ljriley90
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 11:31 pm

Re: Tribunal decision threatens overseas cricketers in club game

Post by ljriley90 »

CrimsonAvenger wrote:
Thu Aug 31, 2017 2:57 pm
ljriley90 wrote:
Thu Aug 31, 2017 2:53 pm
Anyone who has ever played t20, List A or FC for a franchise or state however long ago is classed as a pro sportsman and will need a tier 5 visa to enter the UK. To qualify for the tier 5 they need to have played 5 FC game sin last 24 months.
So, that means the guys who played one or two games as fill ins - like Zhawi, Diplock, Bowie, etc. - are marooned from both ends of this rule?
Unforutnately yes.

Well my last post are the official rulings in the ecb manifest on overseas players. But I know for a fact there's plenty of players currently playing in the uk from overseas who don't meet the criteria it's not been very well policed over here - but it's a risk for a club going for a guy like those above, theres a good chance their visa gets rejected. My club wouldn't run that risk.

Post Reply