Excellent piece by Mark Eklid on Matt Lineker in the DET today.
You can read it at:
http://www.thisisderbyshire.co.uk/Lineker-takes-gamble-prove-s-late-class-hit/story-13236363-detail/story.html
Yeah, I know I said there'd be no blog today, but couldn't help it....
Brilliant piece, and very articulately explained by Lineker. I really do hope that the club stick with him and give him a full contract for next season at least.
ReplyDeleteWhilst I understand the logic behind the ECB scheme, it seems quite wrong that a persons employment is at risk because of their age. Any club would surely want to play their best players, irrespective of their age. So Ageism at 26 - come-on ECB be fair!!
Yes Alan,i agree with you and share your concern. Lineker deserves another year and at 26 he is hardly a candidate for a free bus pass.
ReplyDeleteWhilst counties will obviously welcome ECB money,i still believe the system is flawed and needs an overhaul. Take Thornley for example. His employment prospects are greatly reduced because Sussex will take a large slice of the ECB money on the grounds that they brought him up. As far as i,m concerned,once a player is released by a county and i underline released,that county should receive no further finacial compensation. It is wholly unfair on the player himself,who is penalised through no fault of his own.
It makes me wonder what may happen to some of our young player once they reach 26. Do we throw them out,at a time when they wont even have reached their peak,in order to reap the financial gain of playing those who are younger. It doesn,t apply to most of our players at the moment,but the day will surely dawn.
The article on Lineker is very good and for my money i would far rather a local lad such as him gets a new deal,than someone like Smith,who can,t be arsed even to qualify.
The ECB age rules to me are bordering on illegal but if we are going to ged rid of everyone when they get to 25 then who is going to join us? If we have got two hundred grand to blow on one players wages for a year then what we may lose on playing a few over 25s is relative peanuts! I'd love us to give Lineker a new contract, he deserves it.
ReplyDeleteBen
Best of luck Matt.
ReplyDeleteQuite agree the criticism made with the way these positive inducements indirectly prejudice those outside their qualifying criteria.
I accept that we can ill afford to use up a large number of, what are now, scarce positions within every diminishing squads, but is the balance right? Maybe seven or, possibly eight below 30 with a top up for four below 25 in order to gain full funding would be closer to the mark and more workable for many sides.
We'll not spend anything like 200K on a player Ben. The Collingwood 'figure' came from his agent and we wouldn't pay that. Maybe for a Ponting or Kallis, but they won't come so...
ReplyDeleteWithout wishing misfortune on him, I'd have to say that the chances of someone coming into first class cricket for the first time at 26 and making the grade aren't great, and there aren't many successful precedents I can think of here or elsewhere. Dan Birch springs to mind as a recent example.
ReplyDeleteNor do I think Lineker has been put in a very fair position, with every chance of failing, and limited chances to show what he can do.
However, one interesting point is the apparent disparity between Lineker's history of events and what I recall of Morris's. I stand to be corrected, but I'm sure I recall Morris claiming that Lineker had been offered previous contracts and turning them down because he preferred to stay with his full-time job - suggesting he hadn't been given a chance previously because he lacked commitment. Lineker's version is strikingly at odds with this and puts responsibility on the club's management for not offering a proper contract. If my recollection of what Morris said is wrong, my hypothesis falls down, but I wonder whether this apparent double-speak unintentionally sheds some light on why players were so fed up with Morris' management style.