As the fifth Ashes Test drew to a humiliating close, Channel Nine’s resident irritant James Brayshaw had a rare moment of clarity.
He asked Mark Nicholas whether it was concern that so many foreign players had donned the Three Lions for England.
Nicholas nonchalantly replied that it wasn’t, and then gave a flimsy explanation about how there was talent in England’s county system, and players had earned the right to represent their adopted country.
The easy argument against the influx of foreign players into English cricket would be to target Kevin Pietersen and the many controversies that have dogged his illustrious career, including the infamous ‘Textgate’ of 2012.
For all of Pietersen’s talent and charisma, he will always be introduced as ‘South African-born’.
But this isn’t purely about Pietersen, and this will not focus on the same rhetoric that continues to be spurted out regarding his talent/ego/lack of humility etc.
This is about highlighting what this scribe perceives to be a serious problem in the English system, which is that it is only English through the location of the system itself.
You have to go back to December 2003 to find an English Test side which has a full 11 players who actually came through the system, let alone were even born in the country.
For those curious enough it was a Test against Sri Lanka in Galle, when Michael Vaughan took over the captaincy from Chennai-born Nasser Hussain.
This isn’t an attack on Andrew Strauss, Matthew Prior or Ben Stokes, among others, who were born outside of the Mother Country but moved as children.
This is about what should be a worrying trend that is growing in English cricket, whereby promising players are poached through loose ties to England, having not even gone through the proper junior system.
Consider the English squad for the recent Ashes tour, where six members were born outside England, four of which came through other systems:
Matthew Prior (vc)
Born in Johannesburg, South Africa, and moved to England with his family aged 11.
Gary Ballance
Grew up on a tobacco farm in Harare. Aged just 16, Ballance appeared for Zimbabwe at the 2006 Under-19 World Cup, and had already set sights on playing for England.
Kevin Pietersen
Born to an English mother and an Afrikaner father Jannie, Pietersen attended Maritzburg College, Pietermaritzburg, and made his first-class cricket debut for Natal’s B team in 1997, aged 17, where he was regarded predominantly as an off spin bowler and a hard-hitting lower-order batsman.
He switched allegiances to England after a lack of opportunities and cited the racial quota system as one of the premier reasons.
Boyd Rankin
The Northern Irishman from Londonderry represented Ireland at every age group from under-13 upwards. He switched allegiances in 2010 in the hope of playing Test cricket.
Ben Stokes
The son of rugby league player and coach Gerard Stokes. He moved to England at the age of 12 after his father was appointed head coach of Workington Town rugby league club. His parents have since moved back to New Zealand.
Jonathan Trott
Born in Cape Town to a South African family of English descent. Educated at Rondebosch Boys’ High School and Stellenbosch University, he played for South Africa at both under-15 and under-19 level.
Trott is eligible to play for England as a result of his grandparents being English.
Consider also, the England Lions squad that hit Australian shores this summer, which contained Barbadian Chris Jordan and Australian Sam Robson.
Jordan was born in Barbados and completed his education at the prestigious Dulwich College through a sporting scholarship.
His maternal grandparents are British Citizens and he has British citizenship, via a British passport.
Robson was born to an Australian father and English mother who played U-19 cricket for Australia. He left Sydney after school as he was stuck behind schoolmate Usman Khawaja, Phillip Hughes, and others in the NSW pecking order.
He started to play for the Middlesex second XI in 2008, and played his first List A match for Middlesex against Worcestershire in the NatWest Pro40 League in September of that year.
Cricket Australia changed their rules in August 2013 to allow dual nationals to be treated as overseas players in Australia, in a ploy that could have led Robson to playing for the Australian Test side had he not chosen to represent England.
For every Joe Root, there’s a Gary Ballance – a Zimbabwe-born batsman who is a relative of former Zimbabwean skipper Dave Houghton.
He took up a sports scholarship at leading English school Harrow the same year of his Zimbabwean appearance and his relationship to Houghton helped secure several appearances for Derbyshire as a schoolboy.
He has been tipped to follow in the footsteps of another Zimbabwean-cum-English batsman Graeme Hick, who was selected in the Zimbabwean squad for the 1983 World Cup, but didn’t play a game.
For every Stuart Broad, there’s Boyd Rankin, who shot to prominence in the 2007 World Cup by snaring three wickets in Ireland’s remarkable win against Pakistan.
Rankin’s inclusion in the Ashes squad appeared to be at the expense of experienced seamer Graham Onions, who had a career-best county season for Durham.
Hindsight being the wonderful tool it is, Rankin’s selection was an abject failure.
Eoin Morgan and Ed Joyce are two other Irishmen to make the switch. Morgan captained England in an ODI against Ireland, while Joyce ironically moved back to Ireland after failing to regain his spot in the English side.
Joyce’s to-ing and fro-ing of allegiances cannot be overlooked here, and it’s something he divulged to Cricinfo in 2010 after he moved back to play for Ireland, having received special dispensation from the ICC to do so.
“When I made the decision in 2001 to try and play for England, it was with a view to trying to play Test cricket which is the pinnacle of the game and which of course Ireland doesn’t play,” Joyce said.
“While I strongly believe I’m good enough to play Test cricket for England, I’ve taken the decision now to try and play for Ireland again.
“There are a few reasons for this, with the most obvious being that I’m a born and bred Irishman. Secondly, I feel I have a lot to offer to Irish cricket.”
The move to play for England wasn’t for love of the badge, or love of the country. It was a career opportunity, nothing more. When that opportunity dimmed, Joyce moved back.
This is hardly an uncommon theme in English cricket. Scottish all-rounder Gavin Hamilton played one Test for England in 1999, after being impressing the English selectors (and then-coach Duncan Fletcher, a Zimbabwean) with his performances for Scotland in the 1999 World Cup.
Hamilton was discarded almost instantly, and was forced to then re-qualify for Scotland in order to resume something of an international career.
Fletcher’s complete disdain for Hamilton’s career is a mystery, and as we speak, it is possible that something similar could happen to Rankin. who is 30 in July.
Foreign players see England as a land of opportunity, as a way of bypassing their own system to play Test cricket.
There seems to be a psyche embedded in the English system where if an overseas player scores the runs and takes the wickets, all he needs to do is bide the time, cross the ‘T’s and dot the ‘I’s and he’s in the side.
Robson is another beneficiary of this mentality who could make his debut for England in the upcoming Sri Lanka series.
A consistent opening batsman, Robson – like many Australian grade players – decided to ply his trade in England through the use of his dual citizenship courtesy of his mother’s English heritage.
This mentality is rife in England, while it is absent across other countries. Staunch English supporters rebut with tired examples of Dav Whatmore, Kepler Wessels or even Fawad Ahmed, but they’re rewriting history to suit their argument.
It should worry English cricket that so many talented home grown youngsters are shunted to the side while imports are allowed to bide their time. It has made England the laughing stock of the international scene.
Simply put, you can’t have England as a cricketing nation when as many as half the team’s development has been harnessed elsewhere.
Consider this. England’s ratio of foreign imports to home-grown talent is probably only matched by associate countries such as the Netherlands and Italy, which is largely due to players harboring the same dream to establish an international career and the lack of a quality domestic system.
But in England, the bevy of counties across two tiers dilutes the talent, while making it an attractive prospect for middling overseas cricketers to make a living through the game they love.
In the process, it gives them the opportunity to defect once their talents are noticed, and by and large that is the essence of the English team at present.
With English cricket at its lowest ebb in decades, this is an issue that needs to be sorted under new managing director Paul Downton.
But it is one that may just be swept under the carpet.
And if it does, then the curse of the Foreign Legion will linger.
Smoochy the rhino
Guest
From another Englishman's perspective: http://theoldbatsman.blogspot.in/2014/02/elegy-for-kp.html "But KP was English, or at least he was playing for England, and the English psyche, deeply conservative, deeply repressed, is a challenging place for the non-conformist. It was doomed from the start and I knew it. In a way, it's amazing that he lasted as long as he did." Couldn't have said it better myself
Smoochy the rhino
Guest
So the British cricketing establishment did not have a problem with KP? Or Tony Greig? Or Darren Pattinson (who has openly spoken out about how difficult the aftermath of his selection was - he was pilloried for being an "Aussie" in the "England" cricket team? I think perhaps you find the overseas criticism unfair... but you do have a strong portion of homegrown criticism also. Denying that is completely blinkered. The fact remains this issue will not go away and for good reason so long as test matches remain a matter of national pride and England are the most open team to careerists.
Claude Bottom
Guest
The bottom line in all of this is that we won the Ashes and England didn't. Personally I'm loving it.
Arto
Guest
@ Steven McBain: At the risk of antagonising you & other Brits, your argumentation (IMO) seems to be all but acknowledge the point Alex Paull is trying to make: that England doesn't see the danger in the strategy they have decided upon, which is to incorporate players developed by foreign cricket associations into their own Test team. I'm not so sure I agree with the point as I haven't necessarily seen enough evidence in this article - KP, & Trott (and Ballance & Rankin to a lesser extent seeing as they've just started their Test careers) seem to be the only real examples of this happening to a degree which harms locally developed players. The examples of Robson, Stokes, & Prior are disingenious IMO as they moved to the UK as kids and therefore are a definite part of the UK development system (although Robson could be argued to be more of a product of Aus' system)... However, the suggestion Alex Paull makes is an interesting topic for discussion as it might be something that is more common to English cricket than other cricket nations. And for all the people bringing in the issue of Australian rugby can be accused of the same mistake, there's a tab at the top of this page which says Rugby and is the link to the forum on that sport where that accusation can be debated further... :-)
Bakkies
Guest
What about the England rugby team?
Steven McBain
Roar Guru
I find it laughable that you are saying the English are divided on 'foreigners' when it is everyone else who keeps raising the topic of where people are born. There have been I don't know how many articles on here no this very topic as well as a whole host of articles regarding the Khawaja issue. Not one that I can recall was written by someone English or in my case a Brit. I don't think the English have an issue with the foreign players, far from it and I don't think any of the English papers or media have made any great reference to KP's nationality that I have seen this week. KP is liked and loathed because of his attitude and ego, I don't see why you are bringing nationality into it. Maybe it's your issue......
Alex Paull
Guest
Hi Robbie, I've explicitly outlined that it is not the development of Prior and Stokes I'm questioning, rather the development of Pietersen and Ballance etc through other nation's systems. I merely put Prior and Stokes on the list to illustrate the foreign nature of the squad.
felix
Guest
I believe the conclusion is if I Learn how to hold the bat in Aus then Aus is the country I should represent,Die hard fans belief. Bieng born in Aus then learning how to bowl or bat in SA,then I should represent SA,isnt that right Biltong?
Totally agree Nick, but sadly the diehard fan is also dying out, I have seen many fans (especially those on the recieving end of these mercenaries) who has no issue with it. National pride these days are easily bought.
Robbie
Guest
I don't think you can fairly count Stokes and Prior on this list. Although they were born overseas they're products of the English county system, unlike Pietersen and Ballance
nick
Guest
i agree Biltongbek - that mercenary element is there and that's what annoys people. Sport is professional so being a professional sportsman may not invoke emotional responses from the sportsman but for the fans its a different matter. You can jump up and down and say it's not, but test matches are a question of national pride. That's why they're interesting. So when it comes to cricket, England cop more flak than any other country because they have a system for the careerists. Sam Robson seems like a nice guy but he's a careerist - what comes first is his career (as it was for Ed Joyce) not country. A die hard supporter is never going to fully accept this. And whilst England does this more than any other country and has a "barbarians" feel to its team with four or five implants they'll cop it and understandably so. You can't buy true pride.
Steven McBain
Roar Guru
I would point out though I DO have an issue with countries hand picking teenagers etc from other countries and then bringing them across explicity to represent that country at a given sport, that's entirely wrong.
Steven McBain
Roar Guru
I think the UK itself though is very diverse and is possibly far more comfortable with that fact than many other nations. Hence those other nations keep bringing it up as an issue whereas the Brits (I include myself in that as a Scot) are far less hung up about it.
I think a distinction must be made between "elsewhere born" and "elsewhere raised" The reason why I say that is culture differs from country to country, the sporting culture and also society itself is different from country to country, someone who spent the majority of his adolescent years in England will have adopted much more of their culture than someone who moved to England as a young adult. Then again, sometimes it has nothing to do with culture, there are certain characteristics like arrogance, big ego's and brashness that is simply innate to an individual. Having said all that, I do believe professional sport has brought about a mercenary culture amongst sportsmen. They will go where the money is and the pride of representing a nation has been tarnished, that "purity" is gone.
Alex
Roar Rookie
Hi Steven, Everyone does seem to be at it, except in cricket, where, associate nations and the West Indies aside, there is not another country in the world with a squad as diverse as England. That in itself could be an interesting talking point.
Steven McBain
Roar Guru
Articles of this type were being wheeled out almost daily in the run up to the Ashes and almost all of them were written from a very one sided point of view with little recognition of how rife it is in so many sports in so many nations. England have possibly had more than their fair share as a hangover from the reminants of the Colonial ties and allegiances but that will phase out to a degree in terms of concentration. Cricket always seems to bring it into focus because of the background of those nations in the main. People all over the world live in different countries nowadays and more and more people in different sports in different sports will not all be born and bred. Doesn't need to be an issue unless people want it to be. Everyone's at it. Nothing to see here as they say.
Alex
Roar Rookie
Hi Johan, I explicitly outlined that it wasn't an attack on the players who were born overseas and then moved as children (ie. the examples of Prior, Stokes etc) My issue is that a growing number of players who play for England are actually coming through the systems of other nations. The examples you named of Symonds, Khawaja and Henriques, while born overseas, came through our system. And Symonds was heavily courted by English officals after blazing 250-odd as a 19-20 year old. The examples you used about the Aussie rugby team is very true, however this article wasn't about rugby. It was pointing at what I saw was a troubling issue in English cricket. Feel free to write about the similar issue for Aussie rugby, by all means.
felix
Guest
Well in my College days I scored 5 hundreds at club level,had no idea English scouts were watching,was then approached to play county cricket in England,unfortunately in those years I had to move back to Spain from SA because of a davastating family crisis but now I'm back in SA and my first love has always been rugby. My point is it is that easy to go to England if you have belief in your talent and work on perfecting it,the pitches in England,NZ and WI are what is holding talent back,I will never believe you can come from slow and low pitches then expect to have a better record than SA and Aus,their pitches give average players with just a few special players shining here and there. Thats my story and opinion,could be wrong but yeah.
Smoochy the rhino
Guest
England has unique problems. But Australia hasn't had a KP situation yet. Or a Greig situation yet. Situations where the "foreigner" rightly or wrongly ends up being despised by half of the establishment. This is part of the problem in England - an inbuilt divide that some"foreigners" like KP end up on the wrong side of. Take the KP situation: There is a school of ex-English captains like Atherton, Willis who agree he should have been dumped. A dour school. Traditionally England fosters a conservative, classical style of play - players will be criticized more for playing a shot and being caught than looking to leave and getting clean bowled. When we talk broadly, this characteristic is very English. Then there are more innovative captains like Vaughan, Botham, Stewart who come out in support of KP who are obviously in the minority. Players who had flair. All countries have foreigners but philosophically England are innately divided on calling their own "foreigners" their own - the MCC establishment don't seem to like them much.
Johan
Guest
DJW is totally right. This article needed more research and is very selective. sovereign - there are a lot more foreign born players who have played for Australia than 3 in the last 40 years. No-one even mentioned Khawaja Until you but he is 4 and what about Andrew Symonds born in England and Moises Henrinques- an immigrant from Portugal. Including whatmore, wessels and ahmed. That's 6 right there!!! This article could easily be about the Ausralian rugby union or soccer teams which are full of foreign born players. The current australian rugby team have half their team as immigrants including their best players like Genia (Papua new Guinea), cooper (new Zealand), Pocock (Zimbabwe) Moore (Irish parents born in middle east) Harris (new Zealand) Leila llifano (new Zealand) and several other player born in the Fiji and Samoa. Australia is a an immigrant country and uses more than its fair share of foreigner born players in its sport's teams so why do we always need to whinge when the Poms do it? Hypocritical.