Opinion: Of Expats playing cricket….

Is it a good thing? or a bad one? What kind of a response does one expect when one says that a country, like Norway, is now playing cricket and has a standing in Europe, and then you find out that all the people playing over there are Pakistanis, who lived in Pakistan till they were 25, and recently moved?

The same is the case with Saudi Arabia, Hong Kong, Singapore, UAE, USA, Canada, and many other countries.

Here is my take on this subject, which recently has become quite a heated debate because people use these examples to show how cricket is not really expanding.

First of all, the subject is not a simple one. I have come to the conclusion that what you have to distinguish between are citizens and non citizens. Citizens can be of any ethnicity, you cannot go ahead and tell them that they cannot play because they dont represent the ethnic majority. And in any case, if the US citizens of Pakistani origin can go ahead and decide who the next president of the free world should be, then looking down upon their playing of cricket and saying "They arent really americans" is a little foolish. Let them play, because if they play, their kids will play, and their kids, who probably would go to US schools and have friends from other ethnicities may bring them into the game. It hasnt happenned as yet in either US or Canada, or has happenned very little, but nonetheless, it is something that one would hope happens….. maybe in 20 years, maybe 30, maybe 40.

Thats actually the second thing. Recent Immigrants playing cricket is like sowing a seed. It is not like getting on with the harvest. Something is likely to happen after quite sometime. Because of the fact that there are only 10 countries that play cricket, we end up getting obsessed with standard. UAE, USA and Canada are quite high in standard, but not because they have a good cricket structure. Its becuase these are the countries of choice for South Asian immigrants, who are obsessed with cricket. On the other hand, you have countries like Netherlands, Denmark, Ireland, Scotland, Argentina, Italy (to quite and extent), Malaysia, Uganda, Nepal etc who maybe be as high or lower in standard, but it is because of their system, not number or quality of immigrants. Ideally, what should happen is that the ICC focusses, promotes and finances these countries, that have the right system in place. But the ICC, while trying to be a quantitative and fair body, ends up focussing on the immigrant based countries, because they have a higher standard.

ICC should do away with the rule that allows 2 players to represent a country after 4 years of residence. Think about it, a student comes from Pakistan to Canada to study for 4 years, and after graduation finds a job and starts working. That guy is also allowed to play cricket for Canada!?!? Thats just crazy. Additionally, once he has been working for 3 years, in ICC's eyes, he is a deemed national, and they can have as many as those in the team!?!?! I believe the ICC needs to fix their regulation of players. Allow only citizens, and in addition to that set a time limit of at least 10 years of residency before someone can take up 1 of the two spots for deemed nationals. Otherwise, might as well do away with all of them and allow anyone from anywhere to come and play for any country !

Now, one thing about expats that is very important. They contribute in setting up the cricketing economy. The expats have to play on a pitch, so they pool in to get that going. They organize the leagues, they set up the practice and create the demand for the cricker equipment import into that country. They also get the cricket clinics going and at times invite coaches to come and teach the skills. In other words, expats finance the cricket strucutre. Finally, since they already have a high standard of play, if the locals do play them, their practise is much better than what they could have achieved on their own, and it is likely to make their progress quicker. The downside is that the locals may be sidelined altogether, in which case you will be stuck with an immigrant tag with cricket and it would create a barrier for people to get into the game in the first place.

Hence the immigrants do all this, and it paves the way, sets up the structure for the locals to start getting involved in the game. As as example, take a local kid. He is more likely to just show up, if he is provided with the kit, ground, other players etc. than if he is supposed to take care of all those things himself and additionally also get the cricket kit imported.

The ICC, because it bases everything ONLY on standard and not on structure/ participation, what happens is that an immigrant based cricket country cannot take advantage of many things because it really is swimming in deep water for them. For example, take Canada. They have been given ODI status, and their response to that was as lukewarm as Pakistan's response would be if they were given the highest match tag for figure skating. The way in which all of Netherlands, Ireland and Scotland are likely to use their ODI match tag is much better compared to what Canada will end up doing.

So to summarize, only recent expats playing cricket is not a bad thing. It is just an extremely early stage of being able to call anything about it. It should be left at that, and no one should get overly excited about USA having the highest number of adult cricketers in all the associate countries.

The other very important thing to take into account is that expats only playing cricket is not necesarily a process that will lead locals eventually ending up playing. You can see from UAE, USA that whether locals will just pick up the game, or they will not, changes from country to country. The same process used in one country cannot be applied to the next. One can go and play in a village center in an african country and by the end of the day you will have at least 100 people who are interested in learning the game. But you can play all that you want in a park in California, and 99 times out of a 100 people will go about their own thing. In some countries a concerted effort has to be made to bring people into the game. Otherwise, even the second generation of immigrants is going to give up the game and get mainstreamed.