History lessons

Good evening from the Brit Oval where I am watching the Twenty20 Cup quarter-final between Middlesex and Lancashire. Technically, it is a home match for Middlesex because Lord's is out of action this week for the Test match against South Africa. Presumably when the calendar was drawn up during the winter, someone looked at Middlesex's hitherto woeful record in Twenty20 and assumed that they wouldn't need to be considered.

Despite the claims of Paul Sheldon, the Surrey chief executive, that "after exhaustive research" it has been found that this is the first time Middlesex have played a home game at the Oval, I understand that is not the case. In fact, Middlesex hosted Notts in a county championship game here in 1939 because Lord's was being used for the far more important Eton v Harrow clash.

At least this game hasn't been called off because of an ineligible player, as happened farcically last night. Quite how a professional club like Yorkshire can play someone who is a) not registered for them and b) doesn't have a British passport is baffling, but even worse is the way the ECB handled it, calling the game off last night eight minutes after the scheduled start time with the Riverside ground packed. If, as I understand, the ECB were aware of a possible rules breach the day before, they should not have dithered for so long. Perhaps they were waiting to see if the forecast rain would come, so that they wouldn't have to make a decision?

Anyway, it seems odd that someone can be ineligible to play for Yorkshire as an England-qualified player when they have captained England under-15, as Azeem Rafiq had done. Rafiq may have been born in Pakistan, but he was schooled in Barnsley and has played regularly for the Yorkshire Academy and Yorkshire seconds. He is probably as English as Andrew Strauss.

All this smacks of is poor paperwork. Yorkshire are guilty of not checking his full details but they should not be chucked out of the competition. After all, Rafiq's contribution in the one match he played in was two expensive overs in a low-scoring match and he didn't bat. If sense prevails, Yorkshire should be slapped with a fine and allowed to play their quarter-final. And as a gesture to the Durham fans, the ECB should give out free tickets (as well as refunding last night's match).

Incidentally, Rafiq may have captained England under-15 after being born in Pakistan, but Imad Wasim, the Pakistan under-19 captain this year, was born in Swansea!

Comments

[Patrick Kidd]

Well I did write "probably". I don't know Rafeeq's parentage, and suspect none of the comment-makers do either, but I meant that he has as much right to play for England as Strauss based on residency. He came to England eight years ago, has only attended English secondary schools and, most importantly, captained England under-15 and played for England under-17. That is good enough reason for him to be valid for England by my book, regardless of parentage, and it is only an administrative oversight that cost him. Certainly more valid than Saqlain Mushtaq, that new Englishman, and arguably more valid than Kevin Pietersen.

[mike moore]

Rafiq is at least as "English" as new young "English" tennis star, Robson. Mike Moore, Hervey Bay, Australia.

[Steve Jacks]

So, Strauss has English parents, but somehow, for politically correct reasons I guess, you're saying that Rafiq, a Pakistani, born in Pakistan to Pakistani parents who has Pakistani citizenship but not British citizenship, that the two are both equally English. Get real.

[Pete]

Strauss, although born in SA, is of English descent through is mother. Azeem Rafiq was born in Pakistan and is of Pakistan descent.
If one is to draw redundant comparisons of Englishness, as Patrick Kidd has done, one could not say that Rafiq is as English as Strauss.

[Len]

Yorkshire made an administrative cock-up which broke the rules of the competition they where in. Therefore they have to take the consequences of that error. I think everyone at the club excepts that and it was refreshing to hear the chief exec state that ‘the buck stops with me’.

However, this is also a situation so rich in irony it could give you heart burn. Young Azeem was only playing as Vaughan had been withdrawn at short notice by the ECB and Yorkshire had decided to give their young players a chance to replace the injured Rana Naved, rather than bring in short term overseas and Kolpack signings. I guess it’s true what they say, no good deed goes unpunished.

As for Durham’s claim that replaying the match would put them at a disadvantage as Pollock & Morkel would be unavailable, they have a point. Of course, if they’d adopted a similar policy to Yorkshire rather than parachuting in overseas talent they wouldn’t be facing that problem…