23 Jan 2007 04:26:46
Fred
Rudolph at Yorkshire

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/counties/yorkshire/6290577.stm

Jacques Rudolph has signed for Yorkshire as a Kolpak player. Yorkshire
already have Younis Khan and Jason Gillespie as their 2 official
overseas players.

Now, I know that Kolpak is all about EU laws and there's not much that
can be done about it, but I thought that at least while Kolpak players
had to make it clear that they were abandoning desire to play for their
country it was a bit more fair and manageable too. But Rudolph is
saying "I am very proud to be a Protea and to represent my county" and
is still under contract to the SA board. This seems to be taking the
piss somewhat...

Does anyone know more about this? If Rudolph is genuinely retiring
from International Cricket then I guess it's fair enough, but if this
is just a shameless attempt to have a nice season in England to get his
form back so he can force his way back into the SA side, then it's a
pretty flagrant abuse of the Kolpak regulations...



24 Jan 2007 01:58:59
Andrew Dunford
Re: Rudolph at Yorkshire


"Fred" <longhop2005@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1169555206.766928.60630@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/counties/yorkshire/6290577.stm
>
> Jacques Rudolph has signed for Yorkshire as a Kolpak player. Yorkshire
> already have Younis Khan and Jason Gillespie as their 2 official
> overseas players.
>
> Now, I know that Kolpak is all about EU laws and there's not much that
> can be done about it, but I thought that at least while Kolpak players
> had to make it clear that they were abandoning desire to play for their
> country it was a bit more fair and manageable too. But Rudolph is
> saying "I am very proud to be a Protea and to represent my county" and
> is still under contract to the SA board. This seems to be taking the
> piss somewhat...
>
> Does anyone know more about this? If Rudolph is genuinely retiring
> from International Cricket then I guess it's fair enough, but if this
> is just a shameless attempt to have a nice season in England to get his
> form back so he can force his way back into the SA side, then it's a
> pretty flagrant abuse of the Kolpak regulations...

There's something smelly here.

As per the 2006 qualification regulations (I'm assuming they haven't changed
for 2007), a county is allowed to sign only two 'Unqualified Cricketers' at
one time. Rudolph does not meet the definition of a 'Qualified Cricketer'
for 2007 because as of 1 April 2007 he will have played an official
international match for South Africa within the last 12 months (his most
recent Test appearance was in August 2006), and if he's not a Qualified
Cricketer then he is by definition an Unqualified Cricketer!

There is also the small matter of the declaration he would be required to
sign:

"To the England and Wales Cricket Board
I declare that it is not my desire or intention to play cricket for any Full
Member Country outside the European Economic Area and accordingly I will not
play, and I am not seeking and will not seek to qualify to play, in a Test
Match, a One Day International Match..."

which wouldn't make sense if Rudolph remained under contract to the South
African board during the 2007 season.

Hmmm...

Andrew




24 Jan 2007 20:47:39
Andrew Dunford
Re: Rudolph at Yorkshire


"Andrew Dunford" <adunford@artifax.net > wrote in message
news:51mf4oF1kh5ugU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "Fred" <longhop2005@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1169555206.766928.60630@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/counties/yorkshire/6290577.stm
>>
>> Jacques Rudolph has signed for Yorkshire as a Kolpak player. Yorkshire
>> already have Younis Khan and Jason Gillespie as their 2 official
>> overseas players.
>>
>> Now, I know that Kolpak is all about EU laws and there's not much that
>> can be done about it, but I thought that at least while Kolpak players
>> had to make it clear that they were abandoning desire to play for their
>> country it was a bit more fair and manageable too. But Rudolph is
>> saying "I am very proud to be a Protea and to represent my county" and
>> is still under contract to the SA board. This seems to be taking the
>> piss somewhat...
>>
>> Does anyone know more about this? If Rudolph is genuinely retiring
>> from International Cricket then I guess it's fair enough, but if this
>> is just a shameless attempt to have a nice season in England to get his
>> form back so he can force his way back into the SA side, then it's a
>> pretty flagrant abuse of the Kolpak regulations...
>
> There's something smelly here.
>
> As per the 2006 qualification regulations (I'm assuming they haven't
> changed
> for 2007), a county is allowed to sign only two 'Unqualified Cricketers'
> at
> one time. Rudolph does not meet the definition of a 'Qualified Cricketer'
> for 2007 because as of 1 April 2007 he will have played an official
> international match for South Africa within the last 12 months (his most
> recent Test appearance was in August 2006), and if he's not a Qualified
> Cricketer then he is by definition an Unqualified Cricketer!

Having now read Neil Hallam's article in the Telegraph, the Rudolph
situation now makes more sense to me.

Firstly, the ECB has apparently said that it can't enforce the requirement
that the player not have appeared in Tests or one-day internationals for his
home country within the last twelve months. What a fine set of regulations
if they can't be enforced!

> There is also the small matter of the declaration he would be required to
> sign:
>
> "To the England and Wales Cricket Board
> I declare that it is not my desire or intention to play cricket for any
> Full Member Country outside the European Economic Area and accordingly I
> will not
> play, and I am not seeking and will not seek to qualify to play, in a Test
> Match, a One Day International Match..."
>
> which wouldn't make sense if Rudolph remained under contract to the South
> African board during the 2007 season.

Rudolph will apparently sign this agreement in good faith: it is intended
that he doesn't represent South Africa during his contract with Yorkshire,
although he can happily turn back into a South African when the three years
is up.

The article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/sport/2007/01/24/scyork24.xml

<snip >

Andrew




24 Jan 2007 02:01:55
Fred
Re: Rudolph at Yorkshire

On 24 Jan, 07:47, "Andrew Dunford" <adunf...@artifax.net > wrote:
> Having now read Neil Hallam's article in the Telegraph, the Rudolph
> situation now makes more sense to me.
>
> Firstly, the ECB has apparently said that it can't enforce the requirement
> that the player not have appeared in Tests or one-day internationals for his
> home country within the last twelve months. What a fine set of regulations
> if they can't be enforced!

That does seem absurd!

> Rudolph will apparently sign this agreement in good faith: it is intended
> that he doesn't represent South Africa during his contract with Yorkshire,
> although he can happily turn back into a South African when the three years
> is up.

Thanks for that Andrew. It's quite a curious decision by Rudolph isn't
it? It might make him a bit of cash during a time when he's not in
contention for the SA side, but it's quite something for a player to
willingly cut out the chance of playing for their national side from
the ages of 25 to 28...



24 Jan 2007 23:17:02
Andrew Dunford
Re: Rudolph at Yorkshire


"Fred" <longhop2005@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1169632915.380957.184210@v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> On 24 Jan, 07:47, "Andrew Dunford" <adunf...@artifax.net> wrote:
>> Having now read Neil Hallam's article in the Telegraph, the Rudolph
>> situation now makes more sense to me.
>>
>> Firstly, the ECB has apparently said that it can't enforce the
>> requirement
>> that the player not have appeared in Tests or one-day internationals for
>> his
>> home country within the last twelve months. What a fine set of
>> regulations
>> if they can't be enforced!
>
> That does seem absurd!

>> Rudolph will apparently sign this agreement in good faith: it is intended
>> that he doesn't represent South Africa during his contract with
>> Yorkshire,
>> although he can happily turn back into a South African when the three
>> years
>> is up.
>
> Thanks for that Andrew. It's quite a curious decision by Rudolph isn't
> it? It might make him a bit of cash during a time when he's not in
> contention for the SA side, but it's quite something for a player to
> willingly cut out the chance of playing for their national side from
> the ages of 25 to 28...

Yes, it surprises me a bit. Whilst Rudolph has struggled for some time to
cement a place in the team, he remains close to the action (was due to
replace Gibbs for the just-completed Test v Pakistan until Gibbs's ban was
set aside pending an appeal).

It would be a curious decision for a player of another nationality, but
things aren't always as straightforward in South Africa once quotas are
considered.

Rudolph can always bail out of the contract early once he discovers that
Yorkshire is a mess.

Andrew




24 Jan 2007 10:18:45
Andy Leighton
Re: Rudolph at Yorkshire

On 24 Jan 2007 02:01:55 -0800, Fred <longhop2005@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On 24 Jan, 07:47, "Andrew Dunford" <adunf...@artifax.net> wrote:
>
>> Rudolph will apparently sign this agreement in good faith: it is intended
>> that he doesn't represent South Africa during his contract with Yorkshire,
>> although he can happily turn back into a South African when the three years
>> is up.
>
> Thanks for that Andrew. It's quite a curious decision by Rudolph isn't
> it? It might make him a bit of cash during a time when he's not in
> contention for the SA side, but it's quite something for a player to
> willingly cut out the chance of playing for their national side from
> the ages of 25 to 28...

What would happen if he got back into form this season and SA wanted to
pick him? Presumably he would resign from Yorkshire and play for SA
straight away but it seems as though they would be few repercussions.

--
Andy Leighton = > andyl@azaal.plus.com
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_


25 Jan 2007 00:32:25
Andrew Dunford
Re: Rudolph at Yorkshire


"Andy Leighton" <andyl@azaal.plus.com > wrote in message
news:slrnereck5.1fc.andyl@azaal.plus.com...
> On 24 Jan 2007 02:01:55 -0800, Fred <longhop2005@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 24 Jan, 07:47, "Andrew Dunford" <adunf...@artifax.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Rudolph will apparently sign this agreement in good faith: it is
>>> intended
>>> that he doesn't represent South Africa during his contract with
>>> Yorkshire,
>>> although he can happily turn back into a South African when the three
>>> years
>>> is up.
>>
>> Thanks for that Andrew. It's quite a curious decision by Rudolph isn't
>> it? It might make him a bit of cash during a time when he's not in
>> contention for the SA side, but it's quite something for a player to
>> willingly cut out the chance of playing for their national side from
>> the ages of 25 to 28...
>
> What would happen if he got back into form this season and SA wanted to
> pick him? Presumably he would resign from Yorkshire and play for SA
> straight away but it seems as though they would be few repercussions.

That's about the size of it: Yorkshire could presumably sue him for breach
of contract but there wouldn't be any other ramifications.

The reason we know this is that the situation you describe has already
occurred, with Warwickshire's Paul Harris.

Andrew




01 Feb 2007 05:04:19
Fred
Re: Rudolph at Yorkshire

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/tms/2007/01/exploring_the_depths_of_counti.shtml

"Increasing evidence suggests that Rudolph is planning on using his
three years (or less) at Yorkshire to further his international
ambitions with South Africa.

That's despite the 25 year old putting his signature to a declaration
forfeiting all future international ambitions, as demanded under
qualification regulations.

While Yorkshire have been keen to show Rudolph as having a long-term
commitment to the county, Gerald Majola of the South African cricket
board painted a different picture.

He said "Jacques has definitely given us an assurance that he will
come back. In fact, he actually approached us with the whole
arrangement. The real reason he is going is so he can become a better
player for South Africa in the future - he just said he needs more
experience.""

-----

Hmm. Seems pretty brazen to me, but I had forgotten about the
financial penalties that Yorkshire will face (the details are in the
blog linked to).



02 Feb 2007 12:17:46
Andrew Dunford
Re: Rudolph at Yorkshire


"Fred" <longhop2005@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1170335059.650108.251920@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/tms/2007/01/exploring_the_depths_of_counti.shtml
>
> "Increasing evidence suggests that Rudolph is planning on using his
> three years (or less) at Yorkshire to further his international
> ambitions with South Africa.
>
> That's despite the 25 year old putting his signature to a declaration
> forfeiting all future international ambitions, as demanded under
> qualification regulations.
>
> While Yorkshire have been keen to show Rudolph as having a long-term
> commitment to the county, Gerald Majola of the South African cricket
> board painted a different picture.
>
> He said "Jacques has definitely given us an assurance that he will
> come back. In fact, he actually approached us with the whole
> arrangement. The real reason he is going is so he can become a better
> player for South Africa in the future - he just said he needs more
> experience.""
>
> -----
>
> Hmm. Seems pretty brazen to me, but I had forgotten about the
> financial penalties that Yorkshire will face (the details are in the
> blog linked to).

Thanks for the link, Fred - very informative.

It has been obvious for some time that the Rudolph issue is being handled in
a two-faced manner: say one thing to please the authorities in England and
another to the South African board. And of course it clearly breaks the ECB
'rules'. It's a bit sad Yorkshire that should go ahead and flout guidelines
that were previously agreed by the counties themselves, in the knowledge
that the ECB can't enforce them.

I suppose Yorkshire must be treating the 'fine' of 1100 quid per
Championship match in which they field fewer than nine England-qualified
players as simply part of the budget for employing Rudolph. Which of course
isn't unique to Rudolph, since no Kolpakkers are England-qualified.

Incidentally, I had thought that Rudolph was the first example of a county
breaking the 'hasn't played for his country in the preceding twelve months
rule'. However before we get too indignant it's worth noting that Kent did
exactly the same thing with Martin van Jaarsveld. He played for South
Africa at the Champions Trophy in England in September 2004, then was back
on a Kolpak registration for Kent six months later.

The risk for Yorkshire is that Rudolph will leave his contract early in
order to return to international cricket. It would be hard to feel sorry
for Yorkshire should that come to pass.

Andrew