AngusBeef wrote:However, the most eye-catching of the 10 recommendations is for the introduction of a system whereby the likes of Pietersen, whose cards have been marked for life by England, could resume his international career with another nation.
Sure he can do that anyway. Go live in Zimbabwe & play out the qualifying period and hey, who'd turn him down...
Sarcasm aside: this is an argument to do away with the qualification periods that go with switching nationalities. Which would really just make the national teams club sides. You want to follow clubs, go follow domestic cricket
I never understand why so many seem to come up with suggestions that would turn international cricket into something it isn't - whether it be football or club cricket.
If folks want to see improvement to the less competitive sides there are some very simple, straightforward and unsexy ways to do so:
- longer tours with more tour matches to let teams warm up, experiment and acclimatize
- more A team matches
- having domestic first-class seasons with double round robin systems or a minimum of 10 matches per team if a double round robin system is not used. Having the domestic season include concurrent first-class and list A double round robin tournaments (so team A plays a first class match against team B from say Thursday to Sunday and then plays a list A day/night match on Monday or Tuesday against the same team as part of one round of both the list A and first class tournaments) could also help.
- more domestic exchange (e.g. Zimbabwean teams playing in South Africa; Namibia playing in South Africa; Bangladeshi teams playing in India; West Indian teams playing in England and India; New Zealand teams playing in Australia; English teams playing in India)
- more player exchange at the domestic level (e.g. South Africans, Englishmen, Irishmen, Indians, Aussies, Sri Lankans, West Indians, etc being drafted into first-class and limited overs domestic teams in the various domestic competitions around the globe)
- better pitches and better support for pitch maintenance globally
- more support for school cricket globally and for keeping school graduates interested and playing the game after school (right through university and into clubs)
These solutions aren't flashy and sexy, but they will work because this is what has worked in the past and what has worked in the countries which are currently successful (e.g. Australia, England, India and South Africa) and which used to be successful (e.g. West Indies, Pakistan at its heights in the 1980s and 1990s)
Such a program could see Kevin Pietersen playing IN Zimbabwe, but not see him playing FOR Zimbabwe without meeting the qualifying period.
And to be honest, a player like KP I would be very cautious about having him play in my national team given his apparent team trust issues. He seems like he would be far more useful to a country's national program by simply playing domestic cricket and providing bowlers with some good quality opposition and providing other batsmen with a good batsman in their side to model their action (rather than behaviour) after.