Sixteen rules changes have been tabled mainly from the Management Board and the Domestic Cricket Development Directorate.
The clubs are either disinterested in the AGM or they are very happy with the current administration because 15 of the Motions are from the Establishment and only one from Instonians-a minor starting time variation for junior cricket division one. Some of the proposals will be widely welcomed, namely the flexibility in rain-affected cup matches including the final and net run rate to determine the league winners in the event of a tie on points. Others might be a little more crusty.
For example, the replacement of an overseas professional because of injury or domestic call-up sounds fair in principle, but it may be an opportunity to get rid of a poor performer or open another door for those clubs who aren’t as fussy about Rules of Engagement. However, the most contentious proposals will surely be the motions to limit the participation of overseas players in NCU cricket. In the past these proposals came from clubs and AGM archives are riddled with passionate debates between the Pro-Professional lobby and the Anti-Professional lobby, a debate that dates back to 1978 and has never really left Ulster cricket. The difference on this occasion is that the NCU administration has taken the lead in putting proposals before the clubs, proposals that will limit the number of overseas cricket players to a maximum of two per Premier League club and one only below the Premier League, insist that one of the two Premier League players has to be qualified to play for Ireland, define the minimum coaching qualifications required and apply a tariff on their participation. The tariff is an interesting concept as it comes straight out of Robin Hood folklore as the proposal is to levy the ‘rich’ clubs to pay the ‘poor’ clubs as the funds raised are being ear-marked to support the appointment of a Cricket Development Officer for Sections 2 and 3 cricket. That alone should guarantee a full turnout from clubs in the lower sections although it would be like a turkey voting for Christmas if the bigger clubs bought into that deal.
Some people might see these proposals as a direct reaction to the presence of three overseas players in last year’s North Down 1st XI or perhaps an indirect reaction to CIYMS’s chequebook recruitment policy that has brought players from all over the world to Belmont. This includes North-West players and they could be embraced under the domicile referred to in the proposals. After all, what exactly is the ‘union area’ and does it cover all of the six counties? The NCU has had no clubs from County Derry for over 40 years and while the doughty Dungannon plies their trade in County Tyrone we can hardly claim the county to be part of NCU territory. Therefore, is an NCU player living in Derry or Tyrone to be classed as living outside the ‘union area’ and treated similar to an overseas player?
The proposals are sure to open up the contentious debate on overseas professionals, but are unlikely to control local professionalism which is virtually impossible to police. And if passed, they will certainly restrict overseas players coming to Ireland to try and get into the Cricket Ireland picture. They will also weaken Irish Senior Cup aspirations, as Leinster clubs don’t appear to be as insular in their thinking. However, there is a feeling within many clubs that some controls on outside recruitment need to be in place or local players will be deprived of a fair opportunity to establish themselves in senior cricket.
The NCU is a democratic body and everyone at the AGM will have the opportunity to say their bit in a public forum, vote and hopefully accept with the outcome.
However, on the issue of overseas professionals that would be a first!
Clarence Hiles
Editor
