Overseas County Chamionship perfomances in 2002
Robert Henderson
Note: the sheer mediocrity of the foreign players shines through. Even
by the reasoning of those who advocate foreign players taking the jobs
of Englishmen - that they raise the standard of our game and bring in
the crowds - they are not justified. And you can bet counties are
paying £100,000+ each for such players each year. It will be double
that next year. Think how many English youngsters could be employed for
£200,00 per county. RH
Official Overseas Players
Championship performances 2002
Name county matches innings no runs ave
M. Di Venuto Derbys 15 28 3 1538 61.52
M. Love Durham 6 8 1 576 82.29
B. Hodge Durham 4 8 0 361 45.13
A Flower Essex 14 25 5 1048 52.40
M. Waugh Essex 2 4 0 242 60.50
M. Kasparowicz Glam 12 19 2 352 20.71
I. Harvey Gloucs 6 10 1 390 43.33
N. Johnson Hants 16 27 2 812 32.48
S. Waugh Kent 4 6 1 234 46.80
A. Symonds Kent 12 24 2 858 39.00
S. Law Lancs 15 26 3 1216 52.87
M. Bevan Leics 9 14 3 697 63.36
J. Srinath Leics 5 7 0 96 13.71
G. Flower Leics 1 2 0 82 41.00
Abdul Razaq Mddx 6 9 3 364 60.67
A. Noftke Mddx 8 10 1 203 22.56
M. Hussey North 12 21 3 1379 76.61
M. Inness North 4 4 1 66 22.00
N. Boje Notts 9 16 2 409 29.21
S. McGill Notts 6 7 1 48 8.00
L. Klusner Notts 1 2 0 42 21.00
J. Cox Som 13 25 2 724 31.48
S. Mushtaq Surrey 10 13 2 278 25.27
A. Mohammed Surrey 3 4 1 96 32.00
M. Ahmed Surrey 2 3 0 66 22.00
M. Goodwin Sussex 16 28 0 1179 42.11
S. Pollock Warks 10 18 1 425 25.00
S. Bond Warks 3 4 1 64 21.33
A. Bichel Worcs 9 11 2 274 30.44
S.Lee Worcs 2 2 0 80 40.00
A. Donald Worcs 1 1 1 5
D. Lehmann Yorks 10 18 1 1136 66.82
M. Elliott Yorks 5 10 1 487 54.11
251 414 46 15827 43.01
Bowling
Name county runs wks ave
B. Hodge Durham 102 1 102
A Flower Essex 19
M. Kasparowicz Glam 1413 53 27
I. Harvey Gloucs 533 28 19
N. Johnson Hants 769 21 37
S. Waugh Kent 15
A. Symonds Kent 602 13 46
S. Law Lancs 72 1 72
M. Bevan Leics 118 3 39
J. Srinath Leics 561 30 19
G. Flower Leics 98 6 16
Abdul Razaq Mddx 757 26 29
A. Noftke Mddx 1128 45 25
M. Inness North 429 15 29
N. Boje Notts 671 27 25
S. McGill Notts 930 40 23
L. Klusner Notts 88 1 88
S. Mushtaq Surrey 1359 53 26
A. Mohammed Surrey 345 20 17
M. Ahmed Surrey 305 8 38
M. Goodwin Sussex 1
S. Pollock Warks 733 28 26
S. Bond Warks 330 12 28
A. Bichel Worcs 902 36 25
S.Lee Worcs 8 0
A. Donald Worcs 77 5 15
D. Lehmann Yorks 346 9 38
M. Elliott Yorks 11 1 11
12722 482 26
--
Robert Henderson
phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk
Blair Scandal web site at http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal web site at http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk
Porkie
<Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Note: the sheer mediocrity of the foreign players shines through.
--snip--
Looking through the averages of CC Division One players
on Criciinfo, I was delighted to see that six Surrey batsmen
are included in the top twenty batsmen, and that zero
yorkshire bowlers made it into the top twenty bowlers!
http://www.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/2002/ENG_LOCAL/CC1/STATS/ENG_LOCAL_CC1_AVS_BAT_HIGHEST_AVS.html
http://www.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/2002/ENG_LOCAL/CC1/STATS/ENG_LOCAL_CC1_AVS_BOWL_BEST_AVS.html
John Hall
Robert Henderson <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> writes:
>Note: the sheer mediocrity of the foreign players shines through.
I don't think that this is borne out by your statistics. Given that some
of the overseas players are specialist bowlers, an overall batting
average of 43 is pretty good. Similarly, given that some of them are
primarily batsmen, an overall bowling average of 26 is also quite
impressive. Obviously some of them _were_ mediocre, but not I think the
majority. But if it's true that their average pay for a full season is
around 100,000 GBP, I agree that it's arguable whether many of them are
worth it.
I doubt whether Surrey will have any complaints about the value for
money of either Azhar Mahmood or Saqlain Mushtaq, but their employment
of Mushtaq Ahmed for a couple of games was much more debatable (though
he made a brave effort for someone who had been out of county cricket
for a couple of years).
--
John Hall
"I don't even butter my bread; I consider that cooking."
Katherine Cebrian
John Turner
"John Hall" wrote
if it's true that their average pay for a full season is
> around 100,000 GBP, I agree that it's arguable whether many of them are
> worth it.
I'd heard that £40K was nearer the mark.
John.
Andrew Dunford
"Robert Henderson" <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4sh0nJAm...@anywhere.demon.co.uk...
>
> Note: the sheer mediocrity of the foreign players shines through. Even
> by the reasoning of those who advocate foreign players taking the jobs
> of Englishmen - that they raise the standard of our game and bring in
> the crowds - they are not justified. And you can bet counties are
> paying £100,000+ each for such players each year. It will be double
> that next year. Think how many English youngsters could be employed for
> £200,00 per county. RH
<snip>
Too many generalisations in the above statement for my tastes.
The mediocrity of *some* of the foreign players shines through. There were
some impressive statistics in that list, although not for all players.
The point being that although some counties may be paying their overseas
players £100,000 or more (some corroboration would be more useful than
saying "I can bet"), I would expect the better-performed players to be
getting the better money. Granted, a county paying a six-figure salary to a
batsman who averages 30 over an entire season sounds like a waste of
valuable money, and it's hard to imagine that Kent really got got good value
out of paying Steve Waugh £20,000 for a handful of matches in which he
played a couple of useful innings. The increase to two overseas players per
team should result in a reduction in the average salary.
Leaving aside the nit-picking, I wouldn't dispute that the overall standard
of the overseas players has fallen significantly over the past 15-20 years.
The international calendar makes it increasingly unlikely that current
Test-level players will be contracted for full seasons in significant
numbers. So I agree that the "raising the standard of our game and bring in
the crowds" argument is becoming increasingly difficult to justify.
Andrew
Robert Henderson
<news_...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>In article <4sh0nJAm...@anywhere.demon.co.uk>,
> Robert Henderson <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>Note: the sheer mediocrity of the foreign players shines through.
>
>I don't think that this is borne out by your statistics. Given that some
>of the overseas players are specialist bowlers, an overall batting
>average of 43 is pretty good. Similarly, given that some of them are
>primarily batsmen, an overall bowling average of 26 is also quite
>impressive. Obviously some of them _were_ mediocre, but not I think the
>majority. But if it's true that their average pay for a full season is
>around 100,000 GBP, I agree that it's arguable whether many of them are
>worth it.
>
Lancashire league dominates, which they do not, then even by the
arguments of the pro-give English jobs to foreigners brigade, they are
not worth employing.
>I doubt whether Surrey will have any complaints about the value for
>money of either Azhar Mahmood or Saqlain Mushtaq, but their employment
>of Mushtaq Ahmed for a couple of games was much more debatable (though
>he made a brave effort for someone who had been out of county cricket
>for a couple of years).
--
Robert Henderson
<adun...@artifaxsoftware.com> writes
>
>"Robert Henderson" <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:4sh0nJAm...@anywhere.demon.co.uk...
>>
>> Note: the sheer mediocrity of the foreign players shines through. Even
>> by the reasoning of those who advocate foreign players taking the jobs
>> of Englishmen - that they raise the standard of our game and bring in
>> the crowds - they are not justified. And you can bet counties are
>> paying £100,000+ each for such players each year. It will be double
>> that next year. Think how many English youngsters could be employed for
>> £200,00 per county. RH
>
><snip>
>
>Too many generalisations in the above statement for my tastes.
>
>The mediocrity of *some* of the foreign players shines through. There were
>some impressive statistics in that list, although not for all players.
>
>The point being that although some counties may be paying their overseas
>players £100,000 or more (some corroboration would be more useful than
>saying "I can bet"), I would expect the better-performed players to be
>getting the better money. Granted, a county paying a six-figure salary to a
>batsman who averages 30 over an entire season sounds like a waste of
>valuable money, and it's hard to imagine that Kent really got got good value
>out of paying Steve Waugh £20,000 for a handful of matches in which he
>played a couple of useful innings. The increase to two overseas players per
>team should result in a reduction in the average salary.
>
Why? Even if it does, the overall amount of money going out of the game
will be much increased. RH
>Leaving aside the nit-picking, I wouldn't dispute that the overall standard
>of the overseas players has fallen significantly over the past 15-20 years.
>The international calendar makes it increasingly unlikely that current
>Test-level players will be contracted for full seasons in significant
>numbers. So I agree that the "raising the standard of our game and bring in
>the crowds" argument is becoming increasingly difficult to justify.
>
>Andrew
>
>
--
Robert Henderson
<jo...@53amodels.karoo.co.uk> writes
Plus it is not just the salary. There will also be extras such as fares
to and from their home countries, accommodation and use of a car which
will be met by the county. RH
>John.
Paul Hyett
Robert Henderson <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> typed this -
>
>Note: the sheer mediocrity of the foreign players shines through. Even
>by the reasoning of those who advocate foreign players taking the jobs
>of Englishmen - that they raise the standard of our game and bring in
>the crowds - they are not justified.
Huh? The performances below are much better than the overall average of
34-35rpw.
>
> Official Overseas Players
>
> Championship performances 2002
>
>Name county matches innings no runs ave
> 251 414 46 15827 43.01
>
> Bowling
>
>Name county runs wks ave
> 12722 482 26
>
Around 8rpw better in both batting & bowling!
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham, England
Robert Henderson
<pah...@activist.demon.co.uk> writes
>On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, an infinite number of monkeys, masquerading as
>Robert Henderson <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> typed this -
>>
>>Note: the sheer mediocrity of the foreign players shines through. Even
>>by the reasoning of those who advocate foreign players taking the jobs
>>of Englishmen - that they raise the standard of our game and bring in
>>the crowds - they are not justified.
>
>Huh? The performances below are much better than the overall average of
>34-35rpw.
>>
Lancashire league dominates, which they do not, then even by the
arguments of the pro-give English jobs to foreigners brigade, they are
>> Official Overseas Players
>>
>> Championship performances 2002
>>
>>Name county matches innings no runs ave
>> 251 414 46 15827 43.01
>>
>> Bowling
>>
>>Name county runs wks ave
>> 12722 482 26
>>
>Around 8rpw better in both batting & bowling!
--
Paul Hyett
>>34-35rpw.
>>>
>Unless the players employed dominate in the same way that a pro in
>Lancashire league dominates, which they do not, then even by the
>arguments of the pro-give English jobs to foreigners brigade, they are
>not worth employing. RH
Oh come on - you can't guarantee a given overseas player will perform
well - that's just a chance you have to take. However, they are
extremely likely to perform better than the English player they replace.
Robert Henderson
<pah...@activist.demon.co.uk> writes
>On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, an infinite number of monkeys, masquerading as
>Robert Henderson <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> typed this -
>>>
>>>Huh? The performances below are much better than the overall average of
>>>34-35rpw.
>>>>
>>Unless the players employed dominate in the same way that a pro in
>>Lancashire league dominates, which they do not, then even by the
>>arguments of the pro-give English jobs to foreigners brigade, they are
>>not worth employing. RH
>
>Oh come on - you can't guarantee a given overseas player will perform
>well - that's just a chance you have to take.
That is not how a Lancashire league club would view their pro. They are
expected to dominate or else. The vast majority do. RH
>However, they are
>extremely likely to perform better than the English player they replace.
--
John Hall
Robert Henderson <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> writes:
>In article <isoi9XCQ...@activist.demon.co.uk>, Paul Hyett
><pah...@activist.demon.co.uk> writes
>>On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, an infinite number of monkeys, masquerading as
>>Robert Henderson <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> typed this -
>>>>>
>>>Lancashire league dominates, which they do not, then even by the
>>>arguments of the pro-give English jobs to foreigners brigade, they are
>>>not worth employing. RH
>>
>>Oh come on - you can't guarantee a given overseas player will perform
>>well - that's just a chance you have to take.
>
>That is not how a Lancashire league club would view their pro. They are
>expected to dominate or else. The vast majority do. RH
It's much easier for a pro to dominate in the Lancashire League, simply
because almost all the players are at least one class lower than the
average county pro. I'm sure that Surrey, for instance, feel that
whatever money they paid Azhar Mahmood and Saqlain Mushtaq was well
spent. I'd expect that the same could be said for at least two-thirds of
the counties.
--
John Hall
"Sir, I have found you an argument;
but I am not obliged to find you an understanding."
Dr Samuel Johnson (1709-1784)
Porkie
wrote:
> I'm sure that Surrey, for instance, feel that
>whatever money they paid Azhar Mahmood and Saqlain Mushtaq was well
>spent.
I think you mean Mushtaq Ahmed
Robert Henderson
<news_...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>
>>That is not how a Lancashire league club would view their pro. They are
>>expected to dominate or else. The vast majority do. RH
>
>It's much easier for a pro to dominate in the Lancashire League, simply
>because almost all the players are at least one class lower than the
>average county pro.
Not true actually. Many have the talent to be county players but for
one reason or not never get there. There are also a good number of
hidden pros in league cricket, ie the rules on one per per club are
circumvented by paying them for a fictitious job not associated with
cricket.
It is also true that a true Test player should be one step above the
county pro. RH
>I'm sure that Surrey, for instance, feel that
>whatever money they paid Azhar Mahmood and Saqlain Mushtaq was well
>spent. I'd expect that the same could be said for at least two-thirds of
>the counties.
>--
--
Paul Hyett
>>well - that's just a chance you have to take.
>
>That is not how a Lancashire league club would view their pro. They are
>expected to dominate or else. The vast majority do. RH
Yes, but there is a far greater gulf in quality between pros &
Lancashire league teams, than between overseas players & county sides.
John Hall
Nope. Depending on how much they paid Mushtaq Ahmed for his couple of
weeks with them, given his performances it was less clear-cut.
--
John Hall
"Distrust any enterprise that requires new clothes."
Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862)
Robert Henderson
<pah...@activist.demon.co.uk> writes
You underestimate the quality of players in league teams. Some very good
amateurs. There are a large number of people with the talent to play
cricket at the professional level who never play either because they
don't want to or because they never get the chance. Lancashire have
always been notorious for neglecting the talent on their doorstep.
As for county and Test players, aren't we always being told of the
massive gulf between Test and County cricket? RH