- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Firstly, Sam Robson the batsman. He looks well organised, possesses a good temperament, owns a solid first-class record and has diligently worked his way through the ranks prior to arriving at the top table.
Secondly, Sam Robson the Englishman? Australian? Anglo-Aussie?
In cricketing terms, with a couple of Test appearances behind him, Robson is English, but let’s not beat about the bush, he’s Australian and that brooks little argument.
As Kevin Pietersen once, according to Ed Cowan, remarked, “I’m not English, I just work here.” Robson falls in the same category.
With a mother from Nottinghamshire, Robson is entitled to work in this country and nobody can begrudge him that, but my dad’s from the north east yet I won’t claim to be geordie.
Forget those such as Ben Stokes, Matt Prior and Andrew Strauss who, as youngsters, were brought to these shores by their parents and, having been educated here, should be considered English. It’s an issue that has formed part of English cricket’s fabric for a number of years and is one that won’t disappear, however much some are opposed to it.
With a domestic game that has no problem employing journeyman foreigners as British, even though it’s not quite as bad as a few years ago, it stands to reason that the national side will follow suit.
After all, if they are eligible what’s the big deal?
It isn’t a simplistic issue given the mobility of labour, and relevant legislation, that exists nowadays, and England aren’t the only country to make use of such players, but is it really so hard to select from among your own?
The likes of Robson, Pietersen, Jonathan Trott and Craig Kieswetter came to these shores purely for cricketing and mercenary reasons, not for some alleged allegiance to the flag. This shouldn’t prevent, as mentioned earlier, individuals from seeking employment but there is no reason why they should play cricket for England.
Would players of this ability not get a game in their respective home nations?
Remember that the Australian cricketing authorities changed the regulations so that Robson could play as a non-overseas (how ironic) player in state cricket, so he was obviously on New South Wales’ radar.
With more counties than states or provinces, there can be little doubt that opportunity can be more forthcoming in England, which is why numerous cricketers end up over here. Counties, especially those who see it is as development without having to do anything of the sort, will always look for the cushy number and this is where the problem will forever lie.
The selectors are the ones who have the power, should they wish, to put an end to the likes of Robson choosing a flag of convenience.
Just as county coaches don’t have to go down the Kolpak route, those whose task it is to select the national team could alter their criteria to suit.
There is the argument of choosing the best available regardless of how they arrived at that point, and it has some merit, but isn’t it a bit of a cop out?
Millions of pounds per annum are generated by our national team – the county game couldn’t exist without the handouts received by each club – and producing players of the requisite standard should be a necessity for those being kept afloat, not an option.
Don’t hold your breath though, as the argument Robson’s ascension has reinvigorated will only surface again when the next Australian or South African gets presented with a navy blue cap.
Watching the Middlesex opener bat at Headingley, after a twitchy debut at Lord’s the previous week, it was clear that a good talent had been unearthed (?) and good on him for taking his chance.
But as a dyed-in-the-wool Australian, he shouldn’t be plying his trade for England.