How has Lees been dropped by Crawley not!? incredibly harsh.
Seems like we are going with Leach plus Livingstone & Root as the spinners. only 4 seamers in the squad suggests we will be going with 2 plus stokes. Surprised there is no Potts.
Root is a better offie than Jacks so I dont see him playing. Livingstone would at least offer spinning the ball both ways. With one of Overton/Wood and one of Robinson/ Anderson to make up the bowling attack with Stokes (assuming he bowls). Maybe feels a bowler light without a proper 2nd spinner. Jennings to edge Duckett to open
How has Lees been dropped by Crawley not!? incredibly harsh.
Seems like we are going with Leach plus Livingstone & Root as the spinners. only 4 seamers in the squad suggests we will be going with 2 plus stokes. Surprised there is no Potts.
Root is a better offie than Jacks so I dont see him playing. Livingstone would at least offer spinning the ball both ways. With one of Overton/Wood and one of Robinson/ Anderson to make up the bowling attack with Stokes (assuming he bowls). Maybe feels a bowler light without a proper 2nd spinner. Jennings to edge Duckett to open
Picking Jacks as second spinner is a fucking affront to cricket
Agreed, he did a job this season as a part time spinner, on county pitches designed to not take spin, where he only has to hold an end when the ball got old, in an attack with a minimum of 5 but usually 6 or even 7 quick bowlers so he was never expected to bowl long spells.
To ask him to then be 2nd spinner on spin friendly pitches, where he will be expected to attack and bowl a serious number of overs without getting hit out the attack as we likely wont be stocked with quick bowlers, is absolute madness.
Not gonna work.
Dont think Livingstone is a great option on this either tbh but at lest he can turn it both ways. Root is a better spinner than both for sure.
Jacks as a potential middle-order option plus two other spinners, I can see. But not this. What has Livingstone done to deserve his spot either? By all means keep Jacks in there but Patterson-White or Parkinson for Livingstone is an absolute no-brainer I'd have said
How has Lees been dropped by Crawley not!? incredibly harsh.
Seems like we are going with Leach plus Livingstone & Root as the spinners. only 4 seamers in the squad suggests we will be going with 2 plus stokes. Surprised there is no Potts.
Root is a better offie than Jacks so I dont see him playing. Livingstone would at least offer spinning the ball both ways. With one of Overton/Wood and one of Robinson/ Anderson to make up the bowling attack with Stokes (assuming he bowls). Maybe feels a bowler light without a proper 2nd spinner. Jennings to edge Duckett to open
One thing that is certain is that there hasn't been an opener in the history of Test cricket who has a First Class average of 30.05 and Test average of 27.26 after more than 50 knocks and not been dropped. In fact, there's probably never been another Test opener with a First Class Average of 30.05. Even Brearley averaged 37.81 and he wasn't selected for his batting!
However, we know that it is perceived that Crawley is capable of producing match winning knocks - and Lees probably isn't. Lees is five years older. Lees, Jennings and Duckett are all left handers whereas Crawley is right handed.
The fact that Crawley was given a central contract re-affirms England's belief in him and once he was awarded that, he could not be dropped from this squad. "I feel we have rewarded those players who have made a significant impact over the previous 12 months and those we expect to be part of England's plans over the next period." Crawley has not made a "significant impact" in the last year so the award of a central contract has to be all about potential.
Some have suggested on social media that there could also be an element of conscious/unconscious bias - but this is hardly uncommon in sport. Cricket is littered with it. The lad that has 1-2-1s with the county coach has a major advantage if only for the fact that the coach knows all about him whereas he might know next to nothing about many of the others. In football, how many times do Managers sign players from their former club? Garner is an example of that.
Nasser used to say to take the mickey out of Key when co-commentating by calling Crawley "your boy", a reference to the their relationship and the photo below, from Key's book, re-affirms that - " the game drain" is Crawley's Dad, Terry. By virtue of the comment about their unbeaten record, the Key/Crawley combo must be quite a pairing.
It's difficult to know what the truth is but Crawley has to, at some point, justify the confidence in him.
"Golf with Warne, Ponting and Crawley (the game drain). The Aussies have never beaten Crawley and I"
Any guesses who yesterday made a thinly veiled threat all because he was demoted from having a full to an incremental contract:
'Ultimately it puts you in tough situations if you're not contracted because you're losing finances you'd get if you were playing in tournaments. Those are hurdles I'll deal with when I reach them but hopefully white-ball cricket can get recognised as Test cricket does.'
Keysie and I have had that chat already,' he said. 'There's nothing I can do about it. As players we'd like to be rewarded for our performances with England.
So, if the IPL comes knocking he'll be off. The IPL won't but it's great to see that an England retainer worth up to £350K plus a county contract, even if you lose all form or are injured (as Archer has been), isn't sufficient to persuade you not to play elsewhere rather than for England. It will be even less when that is taken away so you have to play the APL, BPL, CPL, DPL and everything up to and including the ZPL to make ends meet. Then you'll be moaning about "burn out"!!!
Any guesses who yesterday made a thinly veiled threat all because he was demoted from having a full to an incremental contract:
'Ultimately it puts you in tough situations if you're not contracted because you're losing finances you'd get if you were playing in tournaments. Those are hurdles I'll deal with when I reach them but hopefully white-ball cricket can get recognised as Test cricket does.'
Keysie and I have had that chat already,' he said. 'There's nothing I can do about it. As players we'd like to be rewarded for our performances with England.
So, if the IPL comes knocking he'll be off. The IPL won't but it's great to see that an England retainer worth up to £350K plus a county contract, even if you lose all form or are injured (as Archer has been), isn't sufficient to persuade you not to play elsewhere rather than for England. It will be even less when that is taken away so you have to play the APL, BPL, CPL, DPL and everything up to and including the ZPL to make ends meet. Then you'll be moaning about "burn out"!!!
Gotta be Malan given that the others who have had central contracts reduced or removed Burns & Roy can hardly have complaints.
I think Malan having his contract reduced suggests England want to go in a different direction after the world cup. potentially opening the door for Root to return?
Elsewhere there are rumours at Surrey that Burns is considering packing it in entirely and retiring from the game as coming off an England contract doesnt give him the motivation to continue....
Any guesses who yesterday made a thinly veiled threat all because he was demoted from having a full to an incremental contract:
'Ultimately it puts you in tough situations if you're not contracted because you're losing finances you'd get if you were playing in tournaments. Those are hurdles I'll deal with when I reach them but hopefully white-ball cricket can get recognised as Test cricket does.'
Keysie and I have had that chat already,' he said. 'There's nothing I can do about it. As players we'd like to be rewarded for our performances with England.
So, if the IPL comes knocking he'll be off. The IPL won't but it's great to see that an England retainer worth up to £350K plus a county contract, even if you lose all form or are injured (as Archer has been), isn't sufficient to persuade you not to play elsewhere rather than for England. It will be even less when that is taken away so you have to play the APL, BPL, CPL, DPL and everything up to and including the ZPL to make ends meet. Then you'll be moaning about "burn out"!!!
Gotta be Malan given that the others who have had central contracts reduced or removed Burns & Roy can hardly have complaints.
I think Malan having his contract reduced suggests England want to go in a different direction after the world cup. potentially opening the door for Root to return?
Elsewhere there are rumours at Surrey that Burns is considering packing it in entirely and retiring from the game as coming off an England contract doesnt give him the motivation to continue....
It is, of course, Malan. Surprisingly or not, he's never really been part of the One Day team. He's 35 now and has played just 9 ODIs of which 3 against the Netherlands 2nd XI this season. He played just 5 CC games last season and for obvious reasons, he doesn't play in the Royal London. So he has become purely a T20 player and it doesn't take a genius to work out that with Ashes tickets going between £90-£155 the main money generator is Test cricket and he isn't going to get in the Test side.
I get the disappointment. What I don't get is the need to publicly voice that. If you don't like it, by all means go and play all those T20 comps but don't be surprised if you lose that £350K underpin in doing so. But then we are talking about Malan and his inflated ego.
He does have a slight point, in that the central contracts system is a bit cliff edge at the moment, making it difficult for the counties as well. Kent and Durham for example will have had to plan, not knowing whether Crawley and Lees would get Central Contracts or not.
The system is quite flawed as well, as the ECB are having to second guess in September who will be key England players next summer! So often you have central contract players dropped by then, e.g. Burns who was dropped after the winter Ashes
He does have a slight point, in that the central contracts system is a bit cliff edge at the moment, making it difficult for the counties as well. Kent and Durham for example will have had to plan, not knowing whether Crawley and Lees would get Central Contracts or not.
The system is quite flawed as well, as the ECB are having to second guess in September who will be key England players next summer! So often you have central contract players dropped by then, e.g. Burns who was dropped after the winter Ashes
I'm not a believer in central contracts as I have expressed previously - the ECB should be paying those players who are picked for squads not for submitting to some sort of "handcuff". Because the handcuffs don't work when you still get situations where the players will dictate that they are going to play in the IPL, for example, instead. Archer hasn't played for England for ages but is still awarded a central contract when the chances are that he won't play Test cricket because the rewards for those T20 comps with less stress on the body will dictate.
Malan has the opportunity now to go and play CC cricket to force his way back into the Test side. How many games do we think he'll play for Yorkshire? If it's still only a handful then what is he moaning about? Is £350,000 plus appearance money plus county contract not enough for playing a maximum of 20 T20s in a year for England? Should it really be £600,000-£900,000 when you might not even be selected and the bloke that gets picked instead of you isn't on a central contract? There will be plenty of time to play in other competitions and Malan will probably do what he wants to do and like others will argue that he's suffering from "fatigue" as and when the situation arises - but still draw from his central contract.
The counties have always been in a situation where they can't plan for the season because of international call ups. The difference now is that players aren't just being prevented from playing for their county because of central contracts but also because of the IPL, the Hundred etc etc. If we're talking about Kent then what happens if Cox gets picked for the IPL and Billings pops his shoulder again. Neither are going to be around for the Royal either - the competition that should be the prep for next year's World Cup!
two good wins against the Aussies, a team that is starting to show a lot of wear and tear (they are an aging outfit) with replacements who are not quite up to it .. a mention for terrier dog Curran, he keeps turning in outstanding performances
Wasn't the idea of the central contracts for the ECB to control the workload of the guys that they thought would be playing for England.
Otherwise you would find even more of the side going worldwide in order to boost their earnings. Don't they have to get permission from the ECB to go to the IPL and the other competitions ?
I think the issue in the coming years will be worldwide franchise cricket , so someone like Mumbai Indians would have a team that travels the world playing in all of the top T20 competitions. Ok they may be called Adelaide Indians or Mumbai Heat in different locations but the squad will be the same. A world league where a side could be crowned world T20 champions. How much would that be worth to the big players ?
Wasn't the idea of the central contracts for the ECB to control the workload of the guys that they thought would be playing for England.
Otherwise you would find even more of the side going worldwide in order to boost their earnings. Don't they have to get permission from the ECB to go to the IPL and the other competitions ?
I think the issue in the coming years will be worldwide franchise cricket , so someone like Mumbai Indians would have a team that travels the world playing in all of the top T20 competitions. Ok they may be called Adelaide Indians or Mumbai Heat in different locations but the squad will be the same. A world league where a side could be crowned world T20 champions. How much would that be worth to the big players ?
It was but we've gone from a flat "no" from the ECB (ask KP about that) to the IPL to a definite "yes". How many England players have in the last few years been refused the right to play in it? How many have been told that they can't play in the Hundred because of work load? They haven't - the players have dictated that they won't play in it not the ECB. So they have lost control of those white ball players despite them being centrally contracted because they can't stop them from playing in the IPL and can't make them play in their own precious competition.
A world league would be worth a lot to the players. But central contracts won't stop that. In fact, with a centrally contracted pool of just a dozen players, you will find that some young players bypassing England because the remuneration for playing for England won't be comparable. The alternative is that we make playing for England worthwhile by massively increasing the amount that a player gets paid for making a squad and even more for playing.
Where the ECB and central contracts have some validity is for red ball only players when it comes to playing for their counties as we saw at the end of last season where some players were allowed to play in the CC and others weren't e.g. Pope for Surrey on the one hand and Root for Yorkshire on the other. Or was that down to the respective players but the ECB would like us to think that it was the ECB's decision? But equally, as we found at the start of the season, we have Test players who are massively "undercooked" because they haven't been playing any red ball cricket.
Wasn't the idea of the central contracts for the ECB to control the workload of the guys that they thought would be playing for England.
Otherwise you would find even more of the side going worldwide in order to boost their earnings. Don't they have to get permission from the ECB to go to the IPL and the other competitions ?
I think the issue in the coming years will be worldwide franchise cricket , so someone like Mumbai Indians would have a team that travels the world playing in all of the top T20 competitions. Ok they may be called Adelaide Indians or Mumbai Heat in different locations but the squad will be the same. A world league where a side could be crowned world T20 champions. How much would that be worth to the big players ?
It was but we've gone from a flat "no" from the ECB (ask KP about that) to the IPL to a definite "yes". How many England players have in the last few years been refused the right to play in it? How many have been told that they can't play in the Hundred because of work load? They haven't - the players have dictated that they won't play in it not the ECB. So they have lost control of those white ball players despite them being centrally contracted because they can't stop them from playing in the IPL and can't make them play in their own precious competition.
A world league would be worth a lot to the players. But central contracts won't stop that. In fact, with a centrally contracted pool of just a dozen players, you will find that some young players bypassing England because the remuneration for playing for England won't be comparable. The alternative is that we make playing for England worthwhile by massively increasing the amount that a player gets paid for making a squad and even more for playing.
Where the ECB and central contracts have some validity is for red ball only players when it comes to playing for their counties as we saw at the end of last season where some players were allowed to play in the CC and others weren't e.g. Pope for Surrey on the one hand and Root for Yorkshire on the other. Or was that down to the respective players but the ECB would like us to think that it was the ECB's decision? But equally, as we found at the start of the season, we have Test players who are massively "undercooked" because they haven't been playing any red ball cricket.
Not sure whether the less contract and more match fees would work though?
A player who got injured would lose out massively, or one that was in with a shot of making the side then didn't get picked. Personally, I would have thought that would push more players into the franchise game worldwide as you can guarantee the money, and it's a short career.
Wasn't the idea of the central contracts for the ECB to control the workload of the guys that they thought would be playing for England.
Otherwise you would find even more of the side going worldwide in order to boost their earnings. Don't they have to get permission from the ECB to go to the IPL and the other competitions ?
I think the issue in the coming years will be worldwide franchise cricket , so someone like Mumbai Indians would have a team that travels the world playing in all of the top T20 competitions. Ok they may be called Adelaide Indians or Mumbai Heat in different locations but the squad will be the same. A world league where a side could be crowned world T20 champions. How much would that be worth to the big players ?
It was but we've gone from a flat "no" from the ECB (ask KP about that) to the IPL to a definite "yes". How many England players have in the last few years been refused the right to play in it? How many have been told that they can't play in the Hundred because of work load? They haven't - the players have dictated that they won't play in it not the ECB. So they have lost control of those white ball players despite them being centrally contracted because they can't stop them from playing in the IPL and can't make them play in their own precious competition.
A world league would be worth a lot to the players. But central contracts won't stop that. In fact, with a centrally contracted pool of just a dozen players, you will find that some young players bypassing England because the remuneration for playing for England won't be comparable. The alternative is that we make playing for England worthwhile by massively increasing the amount that a player gets paid for making a squad and even more for playing.
Where the ECB and central contracts have some validity is for red ball only players when it comes to playing for their counties as we saw at the end of last season where some players were allowed to play in the CC and others weren't e.g. Pope for Surrey on the one hand and Root for Yorkshire on the other. Or was that down to the respective players but the ECB would like us to think that it was the ECB's decision? But equally, as we found at the start of the season, we have Test players who are massively "undercooked" because they haven't been playing any red ball cricket.
Not sure whether the less contract and more match fees would work though?
A player who got injured would lose out massively, or one that was in with a shot of making the side then didn't get picked. Personally, I would have thought that would push more players into the franchise game worldwide as you can guarantee the money, and it's a short career.
Apart from Archer I'm not sure that too many players have been given a CC when injured. County contracts used to be the underpin. I agree that England have a fight on their hands but I'm not sure that paying a dozen or so players who might lose form during the course of those 12 months like Burns, Morgan, Bess and Roy or be out injured for the duration like Archer, Stone and Mahmood will shield us from losing the likely replacements who aren't centrally contracted. It is a short career but the CC only acts as an underpin for 12 months and only for those deemed in October suitable to earn one when, in fact, most their cricket isn't actually played for another eight months.
It should be an honour and an aspiration to play for your country. Perhaps, England players might accept franchise contracts on the basis that, should they be called up for their country, they should be allowed to do so. That certainly is the case with a number of Australians and New Zealanders so far as the IPL is concerned. Plucking at figures but paying each member of say a 16 man squad say £100k per Test series and £20k per game selected should be more than sufficient compensation.
Liam Livingstone didn't play a single game in the County Championship this season. Not one. He played 6 games in 2021 and scored 77 runs at an average of 11.00 and took 4 wickets at an average of 62.00 apiece.
The ECB proving that playing in the CC is a natural pathway to the England side and why they do everything they can to support it. That said, Livingstone is the only player not to have played Test cricket who has been awarded a central contract for this coming year.
When central contracts came in, these T20 leagues didn't exist! The aim was more to protect the players, and especially the fast bowlers, from overplaying for their counties as well as England. In all formats too. The likes of Gough and Caddick were I think the first bowlers to really benefit from this.
Some players will end us as white ball only. Thus it's not a problem if they chase the T20 dollar, and indeed I'm sure they benefit as players from the experience of playing the world's best T20 players in India and Australia, getting used to the opposition AND local conditions.
The one thing I do struggle to get used to is how basic their covers are in Australia. In this country, every club has proper wheel on covers - in Australia they don't even have them at international grounds let alone at clubs. I get that it dries that much quicker out there but, even so, it does look very primitive when you see sheets being pinned down by bricks!
We are on the wrong side of this match now that it has been reduced to 12 overs. Yes DLS will have a big impact on the ultimate target but it is much easier to chase a 12 over target with 10 wickets in hand. Presumably though, Maxwell or another unused bowler will now have to bowl one of the remaining two overs and Starc, Hazlewood or Zampa will bowl the other.
Comments
Matt parkinson done dirty again. Only one recognised spinner in the squad..
Seems like we are going with Leach plus Livingstone & Root as the spinners. only 4 seamers in the squad suggests we will be going with 2 plus stokes. Surprised there is no Potts.
Root is a better offie than Jacks so I dont see him playing. Livingstone would at least offer spinning the ball both ways. With one of Overton/Wood and one of Robinson/ Anderson to make up the bowling attack with Stokes (assuming he bowls). Maybe feels a bowler light without a proper 2nd spinner. Jennings to edge Duckett to open
Jennings
Crawley
Pope
Root
Brook
Stokes
Foakes
Livingstone
Overton/Wood
Robinson/Anderson
Leach
To ask him to then be 2nd spinner on spin friendly pitches, where he will be expected to attack and bowl a serious number of overs without getting hit out the attack as we likely wont be stocked with quick bowlers, is absolute madness.
Not gonna work.
Dont think Livingstone is a great option on this either tbh but at lest he can turn it both ways. Root is a better spinner than both for sure.
That squad feels one opener short too. Not surprised Lees is out, after not getting a central contract
Probably not testing new ball conditions, so ok for someone like Duckett to open.
However, we know that it is perceived that Crawley is capable of producing match winning knocks - and Lees probably isn't. Lees is five years older. Lees, Jennings and Duckett are all left handers whereas Crawley is right handed.
The fact that Crawley was given a central contract re-affirms England's belief in him and once he was awarded that, he could not be dropped from this squad. "I feel we have rewarded those players who have made a significant impact over the previous 12 months and those we expect to be part of England's plans over the next period." Crawley has not made a "significant impact" in the last year so the award of a central contract has to be all about potential.
Some have suggested on social media that there could also be an element of conscious/unconscious bias - but this is hardly uncommon in sport. Cricket is littered with it. The lad that has 1-2-1s with the county coach has a major advantage if only for the fact that the coach knows all about him whereas he might know next to nothing about many of the others. In football, how many times do Managers sign players from their former club? Garner is an example of that.
Nasser used to say to take the mickey out of Key when co-commentating by calling Crawley "your boy", a reference to the their relationship and the photo below, from Key's book, re-affirms that - " the game drain" is Crawley's Dad, Terry. By virtue of the comment about their unbeaten record, the Key/Crawley combo must be quite a pairing.
It's difficult to know what the truth is but Crawley has to, at some point, justify the confidence in him.
"Golf with Warne, Ponting and Crawley (the game drain). The Aussies have never beaten Crawley and I"
'Ultimately it puts you in tough situations if you're not contracted because you're losing finances you'd get if you were playing in tournaments. Those are hurdles I'll deal with when I reach them but hopefully white-ball cricket can get recognised as Test cricket does.'
Keysie and I have had that chat already,' he said. 'There's nothing I can do about it. As players we'd like to be rewarded for our performances with England.
So, if the IPL comes knocking he'll be off. The IPL won't but it's great to see that an England retainer worth up to £350K plus a county contract, even if you lose all form or are injured (as Archer has been), isn't sufficient to persuade you not to play elsewhere rather than for England. It will be even less when that is taken away so you have to play the APL, BPL, CPL, DPL and everything up to and including the ZPL to make ends meet. Then you'll be moaning about "burn out"!!!
I think Malan having his contract reduced suggests England want to go in a different direction after the world cup. potentially opening the door for Root to return?
Elsewhere there are rumours at Surrey that Burns is considering packing it in entirely and retiring from the game as coming off an England contract doesnt give him the motivation to continue....
It is, of course, Malan. Surprisingly or not, he's never really been part of the One Day team. He's 35 now and has played just 9 ODIs of which 3 against the Netherlands 2nd XI this season. He played just 5 CC games last season and for obvious reasons, he doesn't play in the Royal London. So he has become purely a T20 player and it doesn't take a genius to work out that with Ashes tickets going between £90-£155 the main money generator is Test cricket and he isn't going to get in the Test side.
I get the disappointment. What I don't get is the need to publicly voice that. If you don't like it, by all means go and play all those T20 comps but don't be surprised if you lose that £350K underpin in doing so. But then we are talking about Malan and his inflated ego.
The system is quite flawed as well, as the ECB are having to second guess in September who will be key England players next summer! So often you have central contract players dropped by then, e.g. Burns who was dropped after the winter Ashes
Malan has the opportunity now to go and play CC cricket to force his way back into the Test side. How many games do we think he'll play for Yorkshire? If it's still only a handful then what is he moaning about? Is £350,000 plus appearance money plus county contract not enough for playing a maximum of 20 T20s in a year for England? Should it really be £600,000-£900,000 when you might not even be selected and the bloke that gets picked instead of you isn't on a central contract? There will be plenty of time to play in other competitions and Malan will probably do what he wants to do and like others will argue that he's suffering from "fatigue" as and when the situation arises - but still draw from his central contract.
The counties have always been in a situation where they can't plan for the season because of international call ups. The difference now is that players aren't just being prevented from playing for their county because of central contracts but also because of the IPL, the Hundred etc etc. If we're talking about Kent then what happens if Cox gets picked for the IPL and Billings pops his shoulder again. Neither are going to be around for the Royal either - the competition that should be the prep for next year's World Cup!
Otherwise you would find even more of the side going worldwide in order to boost their earnings. Don't they have to get permission from the ECB to go to the IPL and the other competitions ?
I think the issue in the coming years will be worldwide franchise cricket , so someone like Mumbai Indians would have a team that travels the world playing in all of the top T20 competitions. Ok they may be called Adelaide Indians or Mumbai Heat in different locations but the squad will be the same. A world league where a side could be crowned world T20 champions. How much would that be worth to the big players ?
A world league would be worth a lot to the players. But central contracts won't stop that. In fact, with a centrally contracted pool of just a dozen players, you will find that some young players bypassing England because the remuneration for playing for England won't be comparable. The alternative is that we make playing for England worthwhile by massively increasing the amount that a player gets paid for making a squad and even more for playing.
Where the ECB and central contracts have some validity is for red ball only players when it comes to playing for their counties as we saw at the end of last season where some players were allowed to play in the CC and others weren't e.g. Pope for Surrey on the one hand and Root for Yorkshire on the other. Or was that down to the respective players but the ECB would like us to think that it was the ECB's decision? But equally, as we found at the start of the season, we have Test players who are massively "undercooked" because they haven't been playing any red ball cricket.
Not sure whether the less contract and more match fees would work though?
A player who got injured would lose out massively, or one that was in with a shot of making the side then didn't get picked. Personally, I would have thought that would push more players into the franchise game worldwide as you can guarantee the money, and it's a short career.
It should be an honour and an aspiration to play for your country. Perhaps, England players might accept franchise contracts on the basis that, should they be called up for their country, they should be allowed to do so. That certainly is the case with a number of Australians and New Zealanders so far as the IPL is concerned. Plucking at figures but paying each member of say a 16 man squad say £100k per Test series and £20k per game selected should be more than sufficient compensation.
The ECB proving that playing in the CC is a natural pathway to the England side and why they do everything they can to support it. That said, Livingstone is the only player not to have played Test cricket who has been awarded a central contract for this coming year.
Some players will end us as white ball only. Thus it's not a problem if they chase the T20 dollar, and indeed I'm sure they benefit as players from the experience of playing the world's best T20 players in India and Australia, getting used to the opposition AND local conditions.
The one thing I do struggle to get used to is how basic their covers are in Australia. In this country, every club has proper wheel on covers - in Australia they don't even have them at international grounds let alone at clubs. I get that it dries that much quicker out there but, even so, it does look very primitive when you see sheets being pinned down by bricks!
If we lose by 1 run, that will be Stokes' fault for not running though!