Should Keaton Jennings have debuted for England?

[Abdullah719]

Keaton Jennings - Captained South Africa U19s in 2011, now set to make Test debut for England

The ECB changed its policy on qualification from four years to seven on April 25, 2012. Jennings was not registered by Durham until August that summer. But Durham have evidence he entered the country on April 2 2012, and the determining factor in the ECB’s rules is not when a player is registered, but when they arrived in the UK or played their last game for another country, which in Jennings’s case is March 2012.

Source

Another interesting case of a player moving to another country and going on to represent the adopted country. Will he go on to have a successful career for England?

 

[HitWicket]

I thought the qualification period in terms of living here didn't matter given he has an English parent and as a result a British passport, practically since birth, and it would only be a question of time since he played for SA u19?

 

[Rayyman]

I hate it when non-native players are playing international cricket.

Btw does anybody know how much opening partners Cook has had?

 

[HitWicket]

I hate it when non-native players are playing international cricket.

Btw does anybody know how much opening partners Cook has had?

10 since Strauss's retirement (ignoring Buttler opening in the abu Dhabi test).

Hales
Compton
Root
Robson
Carberry
Lyth
Hameed
Duckett
Ali
Trott

 

[aloo paratha]

I hate it when non-native players are playing international cricket.

Btw does anybody know how much opening partners Cook has had?

He's not non native anymore is he?

 

[Napa]

Read a nice article about him, about how his father encouraged him. Part of me wants him to succeed, while the most of me still wants India to win. Both things are possible in an ideal world

 

[Suleiman]

Why did he leave South Africa?

 

[HitWicket]

Worth noting his mother is English and born a few miles down the round from where he now plays his county cricket.

 

[Major]

if he has a passport then why not?

 

[Dark Magician]

Why did he leave South Africa?

He didn't believe he'd get a "chance" to play for us because Alledgedly qoutas are messing up white players chances hence he decided to throw his lot with The English. To his credit he has never spoken badly about South Africa unlike Roelof Van der Merwe And KP.

 

[street cricketer]

Keaton Jennings was born in Johannesburg and learnt his trade in South Africa. He played first class cricket in SA and captained South Africa U19 before moving to England at 20 years of age when he started playing for Durham in the county cricket. His father, Ray Jennings, is obviously South African. His mother though is English who was born at Sunderland.

But should Keaton Jennings have debuted for England? This is the question that has been doing the rounds in the English media atm. The opinion seems to be a bit divided. Boycott says he doesn't feel Jennings should have debuted for England but should have played for South Africa instead. He reasons that a player playing for England should be at least bred, if not born in England. Whereas Vaughan says he doesn't have any problems with it and that Jennings just went through the process that's in system.

This is actually an interesting debate. This raises a more pertinent question whether international cricket may become franchise based cricket when the country that does the highest bidding is able to lure young talents from another country to it now that the qualification period is just 4 years. Is it fair that South Africa is deprived of a young player developed in their system, especially when they could do with such an opener in their team right now as they are stuck with a middle aged opener with an iffy technique in Stephen Cook. Jennings, of course, is half English. But then again, Donald Trump is half British by birth as well. But that doesn't make him any more British or any less American.

So my question is would you guys be happy if say a Pakistani or Indian cricketer who was born and bred in the home country and represented it at junior levels, but gets selected to play for some other country after 4 years because the said country offered more money and prospects? Jennings case is just an example and my question isn't limited to him. It's a wider one asking whether the 4 year rule may result in international cricket becoming more and more like franchise based cricket.

 

[Adijazz1706]

If KP could, why not KJ?

 

[Buffet]

Why not? Don't you want to see a competitive Eng?

 

[street cricketer]

It is to be noted that already 3 South African internationals (Viljoen, Van Zyl and Harmer) have signed the Kolpak deal with different English county clubs this season for varying periods. Hence the question kinda becomes more relevant.

 

[HitWicket]

It is to be noted that already 3 South African internationals (Viljoen, Van Zyl and Harmer) have signed the Kolpak deal with different English county clubs this season for varying periods. Hence the question kinda becomes more relevant.

None of them are really doing so for any England ambitions however given they'll be 35, 36 and 35 by the time they qualified for England if they stay here consistently that long.

 

[Suleiman]

Keaton Jennings was born in Johannesburg and learnt his trade in South Africa. He played first class cricket in SA and captained South Africa U19 before moving to England at 20 years of age when he started playing for Durham in the county cricket. His father, Ray Jennings, is obviously South African. His mother though is English who was born at Sunderland.

But should Keaton Jennings have debuted for England? This is the question that has been doing the rounds in the English media atm. The opinion seems to be a bit divided. Boycott says he doesn't feel Jennings should have debuted for England but should have played for South Africa instead. He reasons that a player playing for England should be at least bred, if not born in England. Whereas Vaughan says he doesn't have any problems with it and that Jennings just went through the process that's in system.

This is actually an interesting debate. This raises a more pertinent question whether international cricket may become franchise based cricket when the country that does the highest bidding is able to lure young talents from another country to it now that the qualification period is just 4 years. Is it fair that South Africa is deprived of a young player developed in their system, especially when they could do with such an opener in their team right now as they are stuck with a middle aged opener with an iffy technique in Stephen Cook. Jennings, of course, is half English. But then again, Donald Trump is half British by birth as well. But that doesn't make him any more British or any less American.

So my question is would you guys be happy if say a Pakistani or Indian cricketer who was born and bred in the home country and represented it at junior levels, but gets selected to play for some other country after 4 years because the said country offered more money and prospects? Jennings case is just an example and my question isn't limited to him. It's a wider one asking whether the 4 year rule may result in international cricket becoming more and more like franchise based cricket.

Isn't that just like our Tahir cha cha?

From a fan's POI it kind of sucks, because we missed a great LOI threat in Tahir, as he is/was the best ODI spinner in the game for the last 1-2 years, yet instead we invested in Ajmal for all his dodginess and when we needed him the most for WC (both 50 over and t-20) in 2015, 2014, and 2016, he got banned.

But it's great for Tahir because he would've most probably just rot in our domestic circuit till 37, and only debuted this year or something like Zulfi, barely having time to build a career.

He made a great move for himself to secure his financial and cricketing future.

 

[Robert]

KJ says he feels English not South African.

Englishness is a state of mind!