What's new

Ed Joyce retires from all forms of cricket with immediate effect [Update Post #89]

ozzy_07

ozzy_07

Tape Ball Captain
Joined
Jun 22, 2009
Runs
1,063
It's on the breaking news ticker on the BBC Sport website.

Stupid decision imo, you can't just keep switching between countries like this. He switched allegiance to England then fell out of favour and now wants to return to playing for Ireland :facepalm:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
oh can Owais Shah play for Pakistan!? and why was that Peshawar guy not allowed to play for Afghanistan?!?!
 
I dont see the problem here. He has almost completed the mandatory 4 years absence from England team and only reason why he is afew months short is because of WC scheduling, it is earlier in the year this time.
 
The English-born players (Cook, Collingwood, Bell, Swann, Broad, Finn, Anderson) and the foreign-born English players (Strauss, Prior and Pietersen), putting aside their actual achievements, have always given their all for the team, which is the most important thing. The double agents in English cricket right now are Trott and Morgan...they wanted to play test cricket, so I can accept that, and at least I can hope that they care for England...but a triple agent? It is clearly evident that Joyce had no passion to play for England if he is doing this, so I can't say I have much time for him right now.
 
farazaidi said:
I dont see the problem here. He has almost completed the mandatory 4 years absence from England team and only reason why he is afew months short is because of WC scheduling, it is earlier in the year this time.
Click to expand...

That's all well and good- he may have completed the time periods necessary etc. But personally I think it's wrong to allow a player to switch allegiances twice, just because things didn't work out the first time.
 
I've met Joyce - nice lad. I wish him well playing for Ireland.
 
I don't think it sets a good precedent - I'm pretty sure it wouldn't happen in international football - but it's Ed Joyce and Ireland. Would anyone really be that bothered if he was allowed to play?
 
ozzy_07 said:
That's all well and good- he may have completed the time periods necessary etc. But personally I think it's wrong to allow a player to switch allegiances twice, just because things didn't work out the first time.
Click to expand...

yeah. Its quite obvious that he had no passion to play for England, just wanted more exposure to int'l cricket.
 
What a joke!

What next KP, Strauss, Prior, Trott been allowed to play for S.A when they feel like it?
 
Amjid Javed said:
What a joke!

What next KP, Strauss, Prior, Trott been allowed to play for S.A when they feel like it?
Click to expand...

Errr those guys are the product of English cricket system unlike the rest of the imports.
 
Last edited:
MC said:
Errr those guys are the products of English cricket system unlike the rest of the imports.
Click to expand...

KP has much more of a claim than Trott and Morgan too actually, he has worked hard for a long time in this country and it made him the international player that he became.
 
this is ridiculous

pick a damn side

whats next...trading players???
 
Pakistan, Bangladesh and India should combine their team on basis they were one country along time ago!
 
ozzy_07 said:
It's on the breaking news ticker on the BBC Sport website.

Stupid decision imo, you can't just keep switching between countries like this. He switched allegiance to England then fell out of favour and now wants to return to playing for Ireland :facepalm:
Click to expand...

soon you will see Zoni cleared to play for Ireland :)))
 
Excellent common sense decision.

Ireland keep losing their best players, which leaves them weakened. This is hard on Ireland, but then again it would not be fair on Irish players to deny them the right to play at the highest level.

This decision is good for Ireland, good for the standard of cricket on offer in the World Cup, and good for associate cricket. If Ireland were ever given Test status, I would be fully in favour of Eoin Morgan and any other England-qualified Ireland players being allowed to choose to switch back to play for Ireland straight away.

The train journey from England's World Cup match in Kolkata to our game against Ireland in Bangalore is scheduled to take 34 hours and 45 minutes - and trains in India are occasionally known to run late, too! At the end of a journey like that I want to see a game worth watching, not a one-sided encounter against a minnow team fatally weakened by defections to our own ranks.
 
Great decision- when a player from a minor cricketing nation(non test playing nation) plays for a major nation,they should be allowed to have an revolving door policy which means that if they can`t make for a big nation they should be allowed to play for their native country with a short sabbitical like a yr. It would make Ireland and others more competitive and that can only be good.
 
Big Harvey said:
Excellent common sense decision.

Ireland keep losing their best players, which leaves them weakened. This is hard on Ireland, but then again it would not be fair on Irish players to deny them the right to play at the highest level.

This decision is good for Ireland, good for the standard of cricket on offer in the World Cup, and good for associate cricket. If Ireland were ever given Test status, I would be fully in favour of Eoin Morgan and any other England-qualified Ireland players being allowed to choose to switch back to play for Ireland straight away.

The train journey from England's World Cup match in Kolkata to our game against Ireland in Bangalore is scheduled to take 34 hours and 45 minutes - and trains in India are occasionally known to run late, too! At the end of a journey like that I want to see a game worth watching, not a one-sided encounter against a minnow team fatally weakened by defections to our own ranks.
Click to expand...

This decision is garbage and makes a mockery of national selection.

Your "English" team already makes it a mockery, this just continues it. So in essence, a player can play for minnow, if he is good enough you can pick him as an "Englishman" and post all this junk about how dedicated to the "English" team they are - then when they are not good enough anymore they can go play for Ireland because they are not "English" anymore.

As I have said before, don't mind you fielding the UN because your Saffers make the Ashes competitive but I would love to see you forced to play a truly English cricket side one day, you wouldn't beat Bangladesh.
 
Random Aussie said:
This decision is garbage and makes a mockery of national selection.

Your "English" team already makes it a mockery, this just continues it. So in essence, a player can play for minnow, if he is good enough you can pick him as an "Englishman" and post all this junk about how dedicated to the "English" team they are - then when they are not good enough anymore they can go play for Ireland because they are not "English" anymore.

As I have said before, don't mind you fielding the UN because your Saffers make the Ashes competitive but I would love to see you forced to play a truly English cricket side one day, you wouldn't beat Bangladesh.
Click to expand...

Oh, suck it up you big girl.
 
'truly English'...who is 'truly' a single nationality? Nick Griffin (leader of the British National Party for those that don't know who he is) was backed into a corner on live TV because he stresses the importance of 'true' nationality, but to anyone with half an ounce of sense, there is rarely any such thing as being 100% from one country.

I am a quarter Irish and three-quarters English, but I am still English. Strauss, Prior and KP are half-English, half-South African...the former two have been here for most of their lives and learnt how to play here, and KP has worked hard here for a long time and developed into the player he became in English country cricket...where do you draw the line? Where were the forefathers of living Australians from, for instance...? As I have stated many times on here, the only serious double agents are Trott and Morgan, and without them the team would still be highly competitive. not as good, but still fair cop.
 
Last edited:
The England team has been a League of Nations since Ranji back in 1896.
 
Random Aussie said:
This decision is garbage and makes a mockery of national selection.

Your "English" team already makes it a mockery, this just continues it. So in essence, a player can play for minnow, if he is good enough you can pick him as an "Englishman" and post all this junk about how dedicated to the "English" team they are - then when they are not good enough anymore they can go play for Ireland because they are not "English" anymore.

As I have said before, don't mind you fielding the UN because your Saffers make the Ashes competitive but I would love to see you forced to play a truly English cricket side one day, you wouldn't beat Bangladesh.
Click to expand...

For a supporter of a country whose first ever Test team contained a majority of players born outside Australia, you seem very bitter.

I suppose your disappointment that the modern day Kepler Wesselses of this world seem to be choosing to come to England nowadays instead of Australia to get the best education and turn themselves into quality players is understandable.

Will you be protesting against any Dutch attempts to get Dirk Nannes back when Australia has finished with him?
 
Big Harvey said:
For a supporter of a country whose first ever Test team contained a majority of players born outside Australia, you seem very bitter.

I suppose your disappointment that the modern day Kepler Wesselses of this world seem to be choosing to come to England nowadays instead of Australia to get the best education and turn themselves into quality players is understandable.

Will you be protesting against any Dutch attempts to get Dirk Nannes back when Australia has finished with him?
Click to expand...

Look Big Harvey, all jokes and jousting aside, I do object to what England are doing. The idea is you represent your country, not represent the country you have the best chance of being picked for.

And the fact you all come on here and offer such lengthy refutations and explanations about it suggests to me English cricket fans are not entirely comfortable with it either.

Dirk Nannes selection was a joke, his reselection for Holland was also a joke and I said so in both occasions.
 
Random Aussie said:
Look Big Harvey, all jokes and jousting aside, I do object to what England are doing. The idea is you represent your country, not represent the country you have the best chance of being picked for.

And the fact you all come on here and offer such lengthy refutations and explanations about it suggests to me English cricket fans are not entirely comfortable with it either.

Dirk Nannes selection was a joke, his reselection for Holland was also a joke and I said so in both occasions.
Click to expand...

Our selectors are doing exactly what selectors in every other country are doing. They are picking the best players available to them.

It just happens that some of those players were born overseas, but ended up living over here because their parents brought or sent them here to get the best education, or else they came over in order to further their career by playing county cricket.

No ECB talent scouts are trawling the playing fields of Ireland or South Africa seeking out new recruits. Players come on their own initiative to play in the county game. Kevin Pietersen was just a mediocre off-spinner until English county cricket and his own hard work transformed him into the batsman he became. It was the English system that made him, just as it was an English mother who gave birth to him.

County cricket takes an enormous amount of criticism, but this is one way it definitely does benefit English cricket, and I see no reason whatsoever why our selectors shouldn't pick anyone who's become qualified to play for England as long as they're good enough.

And if that upsets the Aussies, then so much the better. As the great Douglas Jardine showed, once they start obsessively whining that the other team's doing something they consider is outside the spirit of the game (like the captain wearing a Harlequin cap, or getting fast bowlers to bowl the leg theory), they begin to believe and convince themselves they're at a disadvantage and fall apart.
 
Big Harvey said:
Our selectors are doing exactly what selectors in every other country are doing. They are picking the best players available to them.

It just happens that some of those players were born overseas, but ended up living over here because their parents brought or sent them here to get the best education, or else they came over in order to further their career by playing county cricket.

No ECB talent scouts are trawling the playing fields of Ireland or South Africa seeking out new recruits. Players come on their own initiative to play in the county game. Kevin Pietersen was just a mediocre off-spinner until English county cricket and his own hard work transformed him into the batsman he became. It was the English system that made him, just as it was an English mother who gave birth to him.

County cricket takes an enormous amount of criticism, but this is one way it definitely does benefit English cricket, and I see no reason whatsoever why our selectors shouldn't pick anyone who's become qualified to play for England as long as they're good enough.

And if that upsets the Aussies, then so much the better. As the great Douglas Jardine showed, once they start obsessively whining that the other team's doing something they consider is outside the spirit of the game (like the captain wearing a Harlequin cap, or getting fast bowlers to bowl the leg theory), they begin to believe and convince themselves they're at a disadvantage and fall apart.
Click to expand...

Another long post in defence of the set up.....
 
Masterji said:
Great decision- when a player from a minor cricketing nation(non test playing nation) plays for a major nation,they should be allowed to have an revolving door policy which means that if they can`t make for a big nation they should be allowed to play for their native country with a short sabbitical like a yr. It would make Ireland and others more competitive and that can only be good.
Click to expand...

very very good point :14:....this should be the case with minor cricketing nations...
 
Big Harvey said:
Our selectors are doing exactly what selectors in every other country are doing. They are picking the best players available to them.

It just happens that some of those players were born overseas, but ended up living over here because their parents brought or sent them here to get the best education, or else they came over in order to further their career by playing county cricket.

No ECB talent scouts are trawling the playing fields of Ireland or South Africa seeking out new recruits. Players come on their own initiative to play in the county game. Kevin Pietersen was just a mediocre off-spinner until English county cricket and his own hard work transformed him into the batsman he became. It was the English system that made him, just as it was an English mother who gave birth to him.

County cricket takes an enormous amount of criticism, but this is one way it definitely does benefit English cricket, and I see no reason whatsoever why our selectors shouldn't pick anyone who's become qualified to play for England as long as they're good enough.

And if that upsets the Aussies, then so much the better. As the great Douglas Jardine showed, once they start obsessively whining that the other team's doing something they consider is outside the spirit of the game (like the captain wearing a Harlequin cap, or getting fast bowlers to bowl the leg theory), they begin to believe and convince themselves they're at a disadvantage and fall apart.
Click to expand...

I have a new pick for post of the week...RA I accept that you might dismiss this opinion, but what I don't accept is that you dismiss it without actually responding to the very good points within.
 
I would like to look at this issue from both sides of the coin.I have mentioned before in some other thread,i would not care for any player playing for another country where there are better opportunities,as long as he does not keep on switching places from one to another continuously.The former indicates the passion to play cricket at the top level,the latter indicates "to play cricket wherever possible".

The other side of the coin is to take the selectors perspective.You can argue its human nature to try to play cricket wherever the opportunity has presented itself,but the same human nature is involved when selectors all around the world make dubious selections sometimes,either based on their personal rapport with the players,or recommendations from the top authority or selection as a mere result of relation.When players leave(i would not call it betray) the country,please do not complain there are selectors who have betrayed the deserving players.It goes both ways here.

Big harvey,i feel your concern of seeing a good match after a day's train travel is not appropriate here.Have to mention the usual old adage "Cricket is a funny game" and i dont think how you arrived at the conclusion that ireland will surely have a one sided game without joyce.There have been many top teams be it new zealand or india or pakistan who have all had losing one sided games in the cup,and teams like kenya and bangladesh who have sprung enough surprises in the world cup.

I have to agree with RA partially here,its harsh maybe to call it garbage but you can call it "recycled garbage" since the latter of course can be reused,though the original sheen can never be obtained.
 
Krishnan said:
I would like to look at this issue from both sides of the coin.I have mentioned before in some other thread,i would not care for any player playing for another country where there are better opportunities,as long as he does not keep on switching places from one to another continuously.The former indicates the passion to play cricket at the top level,the latter indicates "to play cricket wherever possible".
Click to expand...

I hardly think that crossing the Irish Sea to pursue a career at the highest level (which is not currently possible in Ireland) before crossing back when it doesn't work out constitutes "switching places from one to another continuously."



Krishnan said:
Big harvey,i feel your concern of seeing a good match after a day's train travel is not appropriate here.Have to mention the usual old adage "Cricket is a funny game" and i dont think how you arrived at the conclusion that ireland will surely have a one sided game without joyce.There have been many top teams be it new zealand or india or pakistan who have all had losing one sided games in the cup,and teams like kenya and bangladesh who have sprung enough surprises in the world cup.

I have to agree with RA partially here,its harsh maybe to call it garbage but you can call it "recycled garbage" since the latter of course can be reused,though the original sheen can never be obtained.
Click to expand...

I accept that the game may not be one-sided without Ireland having Joyce in the side. I was in Belfast last year for England's ODI against Ireland, and that game was certainly not one-sided, even though Ireland didn't have Joyce!

The real point is, how would it benefit the game of cricket if Joyce was not allowed to play for Ireland? He is one of their best players. His England career is finished, so why would anyone object? Not allowing him to play would be a waste, and that really would be garbage.
 
Big Harvey said:
I hardly think that crossing the Irish Sea to pursue a career at the highest level (which is not currently possible in Ireland) before crossing back when it doesn't work out constitutes "switching places from one to another continuously."
Click to expand...

I dont think its that simple.But this point i accept,would purely depend upon one's own opinion.Personally i would have wanted to see ed joyce playing for ireland,bringing it to the forefront of the cricketing world.When you play for the country you try to make the country get recognition in the cricketing world,rather than resigning to the fact its not possible for ireland to play any better and hence taking advantage of your personal opportunities back and forth.

I would have to take the case of murali here,the only tamil of indian origin to represent sri lankan cricket.Though settled in sri lanka in early days,he could have easily chosen india over sri lanka,when sri lanka was nowhere near a major cricketing nation, for its better facilities,as rest of his family lived here.But he dint do so.




I accept that the game may not be one-sided without Ireland having Joyce in the side. I was in Belfast last year for England's ODI against Ireland, and that game was certainly not one-sided, even though Ireland didn't have Joyce!

The real point is, how would it benefit the game of cricket if Joyce was not allowed to play for Ireland? He is one of their best players. His England career is finished, so why would anyone object? Not allowing him to play would be a waste, and that really would be garbage.
Click to expand...


There has to be a balance struck between benefiting the game of cricket and other issues like corruption,issues like these etc.These days every commentator,journalist etc uses the phrase "Cricket should be the ultimate winner" and tries to brush these issues under the carpet which keep on recurring later.Thats what i said earlier,joyce when the first time he made the switch,it was acceptable but repeated doings,will only encourage players in the future to follow the same example be it netherlands or even bangladesh or kenya,affecting the game itself.


An off top topic question.can i ask you whether you would be coming to watch all the england matches in the league stages in the world cup here?
 
Last edited:
Random Aussie said:
Another long post in defence of the set up.....
Click to expand...

You attack our set up with long posts, so we will defend it in kind.

England have always had imports. It's funny how it only became an issue when we started winning Ashes series and LO games again, though.
 
Last edited:
Robert said:
You attack our set up with long posts, so we will defend it in kind.

England have always had imports. It's funny how it only became an issue when we started winning Ashes series and LO games again, though.
Click to expand...

Yes you have always had imports. Not to this degree though.

Your best batsman is South African, he admits he moved to England because he would not get a go in South Africa.

Your captain and best top order player is South African.

Your number 3 (who seems to be good one) is surprise surprise South African.

Your wicket keeper is South African. Your reserve wicket keeper is South African.

Your reserve batsman is Irish. Now he is English and when you are done with him he will go back to being Irish I guess.

I appreciate your selectors just pick the best players they can (as they should). But it is an English side in name only.

And as I have said before, it is good for the game to have competitive cricket from England, I like it. The fact remains if you had to pick a purely English side you are a minnow in terms of world cricket.

Your team simply demonstrates that South Africans are tough, competitive and high achievers in sport, it says nothing about the country it supposedly represents.
 
Random Aussie said:
Your captain and best top order player is South African.
.
Click to expand...

Its disgusting to see people having issues with Strauss or Prior just because he was born in South Africa and is only half English? The guy moved to England when he was six, had his academic and cricketing education from England, how on earth could you possibly deny him the right to play for England just because he wasn't born here? Honestly discriminating Prior and Struass on the basis of their birth of place is as bad as discriminating likes of Bopara or Shehzad on the basis of their skin colour. Whether you like it or not, all these players have as much right to play for England as Collingwood. Are you sure you are not a member of Australian version of BNP? If not then get over it, even our Queen isn't 100% English? What do you think we should do about that? Anyway, I guess you are an Australian you are allowed to have such views but I'd be seriously worried and embarrassed if Englishmen here also shared your views, but that explains why parties like BNP are rejected and loathed by the the British public instead of finding the success they would in most other countries.
 
Last edited:
Random Aussie said:
Your best batsman is South African, he admits he moved to England because he would not get a go in South Africa.
Click to expand...

KP was a mediocre offspinner whom Notts CCC turned into a world-beating batsman.

Your captain and best top order player is South African.
Click to expand...

He's lived in England since he was six and is entirely a product of Middlesex CCC. He's married to an English actress and has two English kids. The man sounds more English than I do.

Your number 3 (who seems to be good one) is surprise surprise South African. Your reserve batsman is Irish. Now he is English and when you are done with him he will go back to being Irish I guess.
Click to expand...

I might agree regarding Trott.

Morgan is a product of Middlesex CCC, not Ireland.

Your wicket keeper is South African.
Click to expand...

He's lived in the UK since he was eleven and is entirely a product of Sussex CCC. He has an English wife and kid.

Your reserve wicket keeper is South African.
Click to expand...

Eh? Stephen Davis was born in Bromsgrove.

Would you have the Counties employ only people born in England and Wales? That would be illegal, not to mention psuedo-fascist as MC points out.

I didn't hear all this whinging when England were fielding two Saffers and three West Indians, or when they fielded a Zimbok, an Indian and a Kiwi. But we weren't winning Ashes series then, of course. Perhaps you should look to the weaknesses of your own system, rather than the strengths of ours.
 
Random Aussie said:
Yes you have always had imports. Not to this degree though.

Your best batsman is South African, he admits he moved to England because he would not get a go in South Africa.

Your captain and best top order player is South African.

Your number 3 (who seems to be good one) is surprise surprise South African.

Your wicket keeper is South African. Your reserve wicket keeper is South African.

Your reserve batsman is Irish. Now he is English and when you are done with him he will go back to being Irish I guess.

I appreciate your selectors just pick the best players they can (as they should). But it is an English side in name only.

And as I have said before, it is good for the game to have competitive cricket from England, I like it. The fact remains if you had to pick a purely English side you are a minnow in terms of world cricket.

Your team simply demonstrates that South Africans are tough, competitive and high achievers in sport, it says nothing about the country it supposedly represents.
Click to expand...


Aah somehow this concern goes missing when there are Canadians, Chinese, Kenyans, Ethiopians, Turks and Iranians winning medals for Australia in Olympics and other such sports events!! Or do these don't count at all :malik
 
Ed Joyce - Why is he allowed to play for Ireland again?

Ed Joyce had left his country and played international Cricket for England. Now, why is he allowed to play for Ireland this world cup?

Is it right for the ICC to allow a player to play international Cricket for two countries? The only reason Ed Joyce is in Ireland is because he couldn't make his spot permanent in the England side.

I don't think he should be allowed to play for Ireland. The laws on this matter by the ICC are too light.

Ed Joyce in an interview

Why did you leave England?
I have just played 17 ODIs for England. When I shifted to England, playing Test cricket was my priority. The ambition was never actually achieved. I never got to that level.

What went wrong?
I had adapted well to the ODIs and had some moments of success. The last World Cup was a disaster not only for me but also for a few other players. I think probably the timing was not right for me to join England. At that time, England were not very good in ODIs.

Interview from http://www.hindustantimes.com/The-real-joy-is-in-playing-for-Ireland/Article1-664912.aspx
 
Keeping in mind that cricket is just a colonial sport i.e played only by countries that had been in one way or other british colonies, who cares?
 
I don't think there should be a problem with him moving back to Ireland. I think England didn't give him a fair chance as they probably have too many players comming from other countries. I also don.t think he betrayed his country. It was an opportunity for him as cricket's probably his passion & his country is considered as minnows. Eoin Morgan did the same but was able to prove himself in a big tournament & under pressure.
 
i think if ed joyce can play for ireland usman khawaja should play for pak
 
:)) switching countries once is bad enough but twice is just pathetic. Joyce obviously doesnt have much affection for whatever team he plays for. He is treating it like a transfer between two football clubs
 
Yasir Arafat also used to play for Scotland. Right now pak are not giving him a chance but fortunately he gets lots of contracts overseas for the local teams,like recently he was playing Dolphins in SA. He is not a bad player but pak don't really give a chance. I wouldn't blame him if he has to move back to Scotland,although i wouldn't want him to but atleast he gets a chance there
 
OK now, Associate players play for Big team cause, big teams like England and Australia pay good money, they are sponsered team. Teams like Ireland and Netharlands are not sponsered and they don't have contracts.

Everyone associaite player wants to play test cricket, cause you gain more experience, and it pays you more. Small teams cant play test cricket cause of the ICC.

Players like Usman Khawaja can't go back to play for Pakistan, cause he is on a contract, if you play without a contract then your allowed to switch. Abdul Haq is a good example.
 
SAPakFan said:
Yasir Arafat also used to play for Scotland. Right now pak are not giving him a chance but fortunately he gets lots of contracts overseas for the local teams,like recently he was playing Dolphins in SA. He is not a bad player but pak don't really give a chance. I wouldn't blame him if he has to move back to Scotland,although i wouldn't want him to but atleast he gets a chance there
Click to expand...

That scotland team that he plays for is a county team, not international.
 
Last edited:
SAPakFan said:
Yasir Arafat also used to play for Scotland. Right now pak are not giving him a chance but fortunately he gets lots of contracts overseas for the local teams,like recently he was playing Dolphins in SA. He is not a bad player but pak don't really give a chance. I wouldn't blame him if he has to move back to Scotland,although i wouldn't want him to but atleast he gets a chance there
Click to expand...

He played for Scotland as an overseas player when they played against the county teams in England. Joyce has played international cricket for England and Ireland there is a difference.
 
H said:
Hashim Amla for India
Click to expand...

Of course Amla should play for SA. SA is his country, not India. He was born there and thats where his allegiance should lie.

And of course he is overrated :amla
 
Not to mention the fact that Eoin Morgan basically got Ireland into the WC by representing them throughout the qualifying matches...and now he is playing for England...what travesty...

This is the very reason why PCB should sent NWFP first class players to play for Afghanistan to qualify them for world tournies, maybe even bolster their test status claim, which can also help Pakistan with another vote in ICC....

Also, Pakistan should push for Azad Kashmir to field their own team in ICC tournies as well and follow the same support model as Afghanistan...
 
cricfan967 said:
But did he not leave them to go represent England? Because he got rejected in England doesn't mean he should be allowed to come back.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter for Ireland, they are looking for good players, players that could help them do good in the World Cup, and as they can't find anyone else good, they will go with Ed Joyce as he is better then most players in the team
 
Butt guys, Ed Joyce never made his debut with Ireland, he made his debut with England first, i dont even think he played for Ireland.
 
Great news for Ireland and international cricket. There should be a revolving door for players to play for major nations if they can and if they can`t then they should be allowed to play for an associate nation(as long as they can prove a link). As we have seen the associates are not competitive and anything to make them competitive can only help.
An excellent decision by the ICC and they should be applauded for it.
 
Sorry,my bad,i didn't know that Arafat played for a county team /against county teams for Scotland. I read somewhere that he played for Scotland as an international team before making his int debut for pak & remember seeing him in Scotland colourr. Maybe i'm mistaken, but there are other pakistanis playing for Scotland i think.
 
SAPakFan said:
Sorry,my bad,i didn't know that Arafat played for a county team /against county teams for Scotland. I read somewhere that he played for Scotland as an international team before making his int debut for pak & remember seeing him in Scotland colourr. Maybe i'm mistaken, but there are other pakistanis playing for Scotland i think.
Click to expand...

No you are rigiht he did play for Scotland, but that team was Scotland CC. Scotland CC is a county team that plays county cricket in England. Even Afridi and Dravid were part of that County team.
 
Riff said:
Hes Ed Joyce and he can do what he damn well pleases
Click to expand...

?
I'm talking about how he shouldn't be allowed and yeah I love that logic.
Anyone can do anything they want. :14:






















:facepalm:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

WebGuru
Gary Ballance retires from all forms of professional cricket with immediate effect
2
Replies
95
Views
9K
Mamoon
Mamoon
Back
Top