Sniffer wrote:I mean no offence by this, I am merely recalling a memory and asking a question.
50 years ago I remember sitting in my dad's car and him asking me who I wanted to play for sports-wise.
I said for football - Leeds United (obviously),
For Cricket - Yorkshire.
Bear in mind I was a 7/8 year old in Somerset who had only ever been to Yorkshire once (a journey over the Peak District to look down on Mordor-like Sheffield two years earlier).
I'll not deny that my reason for supporting both was that they were the best teams in their respective sports.
My dad said "Leeds would be good but Derbyshire would be the closest you could get to playing for Yorkshire. Yorkshire only play people who were born there."
That put me off the team from there on, and I got to know about the county I had just moved to..
This exclusivity continued until 1992 when Sachin Tendulker played.
My question is: do you think the current allegations/fiasco is rooted in the past?
No mate, though it's a reasonable question
It is, as far as I have always reckoned at least, being a born & bred Tyke, just the same as sportsmen and women playing for their birth country. Any dinosaur connected to the club who think it's anything else, in a racial sense, should be put out to pasture Tendulkar playing here was a clear sign that the tradition had been rested.
The Rafiq Industrial Tribunal case won’t be happening anymore. Yorks have paid undisclosed damages, but Rafiq has not signed any NDA. This may be a case of Lord Patel doing the right thing. Even though there’s no NDA, Yorks might hope this will draw the sting from any further comments that Rafiq may make. Yorks may also have settled without an NDA in the hope of getting back in the good graces of the ECB ASAP and/or of their sponsors. I think the former will be easier than the latter, speed wise. Rafiq insisted, all along, that he wouldn’t take any money if it came with an NDA and has stuck to his guns. I imagine he will have more to say, but the strength of any proposals that Lord Patel may have to make on the future might have some impact on Rafiq’s approach now.
ChilwellWhite wrote:The Rafiq Industrial Tribunal case won’t be happening anymore. Yorks have paid undisclosed damages, but Rafiq has not signed any NDA. This may be a case of Lord Patel doing the right thing. Even though there’s no NDA, Yorks might hope this will draw the sting from any further comments that Rafiq may make. Yorks may also have settled without an NDA in the hope of getting back in the good graces of the ECB ASAP and/or of their sponsors. I think the former will be easier than the latter, speed wise. Rafiq insisted, all along, that he wouldn’t take any money if it came with an NDA and has stuck to his guns. I imagine he will have more to say, but the strength of any proposals that Lord Patel may have to make on the future might have some impact on Rafiq’s approach now.
Sorry, don’t want to sound cynical, but can’t help thinking Rafiq will ‘sell’ his story at some point, hence, he wasn’t prepared to sign the NDA.
When you retire, you switch bosses - from the one that hired you, to the one that married you.
ChilwellWhite wrote:The Rafiq Industrial Tribunal case won’t be happening anymore. Yorks have paid undisclosed damages, but Rafiq has not signed any NDA. This may be a case of Lord Patel doing the right thing. Even though there’s no NDA, Yorks might hope this will draw the sting from any further comments that Rafiq may make. Yorks may also have settled without an NDA in the hope of getting back in the good graces of the ECB ASAP and/or of their sponsors. I think the former will be easier than the latter, speed wise. Rafiq insisted, all along, that he wouldn’t take any money if it came with an NDA and has stuck to his guns. I imagine he will have more to say, but the strength of any proposals that Lord Patel may have to make on the future might have some impact on Rafiq’s approach now.
Sorry, don’t want to sound cynical, but can’t help thinking Rafiq will ‘sell’ his story at some point, hence, he wasn’t prepared to sign the NDA.
Well I'll counter that with a cynical comment that I wouldn't bloody blame him if he did
I don't think he will though, TBH, there is probably plenty more to say from others if not Rafiq.
Isn't there going to be a parliamentary hearing about this too? a Yorkshire Member told me that he thinks there is to be one this month.
I believe there is still rules that counties can only use two overseas players.
Isn't that racist in itself, putting in restrictions, think the powers that be need to look at themselves if they really want to get rid of racism.
To me you either allow overseas players or not, shouldn't put a number on it.
For the record I liked the fact Yorkshire had the born (or educated) in the county rule. Don't see it as racist as it would include all ethnic groups.
Just think it adds a local identity and see nothing wrong in that, wouldn't complain if it was adopted in all sports.
The Fonz wrote:I believe there is still rules that counties can only use two overseas players.
Isn't that racist in itself, putting in restrictions, think the powers that be need to look at themselves if they really want to get rid of racism.
To me you either allow overseas players or not, shouldn't put a number on it.
For the record I liked the fact Yorkshire had the born (or educated) in the county rule. Don't see it as racist as it would include all ethnic groups.
Just think it adds a local identity and see nothing wrong in that, wouldn't complain if it was adopted in all sports.
I really don't think this is a matter of overseas players. It seems to me that the issue is about ethnic minorities being treated equally and without discrimination in the teams no matter what the race, creed, colour, religion etc. is. So restrictions on the number of overseas players is not racist in itself IMHO. If you look at the Indian Premier League in India, there are restrictions there on the number of International players that each team can have so that the development route for Indian born players is not blocked. The quality of the player that that country is producing is astounding. In that same way, I can't see the problem with County Cricket Clubs imposing restrictions.
Where there are no restrictions on overseas players, you only have to look at Scottish football as an example, to see what can happen. Homegrown talent is sidelined and has not had a look in in donkeys years and the quality and standard shortfall manifests itself in the National team
The Fonz wrote:I believe there is still rules that counties can only use two overseas players.
Isn't that racist in itself, putting in restrictions, think the powers that be need to look at themselves if they really want to get rid of racism.
To me you either allow overseas players or not, shouldn't put a number on it.
For the record I liked the fact Yorkshire had the born (or educated) in the county rule. Don't see it as racist as it would include all ethnic groups.
Just think it adds a local identity and see nothing wrong in that, wouldn't complain if it was adopted in all sports.
No that's not racism, it's an agreed employment ruling which all parties abide by, depending on which country or competition they're competing in.
Racism is prejudice, discrimination, marginalisation, it's abusive and it infringes people's civil rights and liberty, and is designed to hurt and damage people. And so on and on. that's how I see it anyway
ChilwellWhite wrote:The Rafiq Industrial Tribunal case won’t be happening anymore. Yorks have paid undisclosed damages, but Rafiq has not signed any NDA. This may be a case of Lord Patel doing the right thing. Even though there’s no NDA, Yorks might hope this will draw the sting from any further comments that Rafiq may make. Yorks may also have settled without an NDA in the hope of getting back in the good graces of the ECB ASAP and/or of their sponsors. I think the former will be easier than the latter, speed wise. Rafiq insisted, all along, that he wouldn’t take any money if it came with an NDA and has stuck to his guns. I imagine he will have more to say, but the strength of any proposals that Lord Patel may have to make on the future might have some impact on Rafiq’s approach now.
Sorry, don’t want to sound cynical, but can’t help thinking Rafiq will ‘sell’ his story at some point, hence, he wasn’t prepared to sign the NDA.
Well I'll counter that with a cynical comment that I wouldn't bloody blame him if he did
I don't think he will though, TBH, there is probably plenty more to say from others if not Rafiq.
Isn't there going to be a parliamentary hearing about this too? a Yorkshire Member told me that he thinks there is to be one this month.
Absolutely, I wouldn’t blame him either, without any NDA in place, he’s always got the option of a newspaper interview further down the line. He may as well keep that option open.
The parliamentary hearing is in the 16th November......
ChilwellWhite wrote:The Rafiq Industrial Tribunal case won’t be happening anymore. Yorks have paid undisclosed damages, but Rafiq has not signed any NDA. This may be a case of Lord Patel doing the right thing. Even though there’s no NDA, Yorks might hope this will draw the sting from any further comments that Rafiq may make. Yorks may also have settled without an NDA in the hope of getting back in the good graces of the ECB ASAP and/or of their sponsors. I think the former will be easier than the latter, speed wise. Rafiq insisted, all along, that he wouldn’t take any money if it came with an NDA and has stuck to his guns. I imagine he will have more to say, but the strength of any proposals that Lord Patel may have to make on the future might have some impact on Rafiq’s approach now.
Sorry, don’t want to sound cynical, but can’t help thinking Rafiq will ‘sell’ his story at some point, hence, he wasn’t prepared to sign the NDA.
Well I'll counter that with a cynical comment that I wouldn't bloody blame him if he did
I don't think he will though, TBH, there is probably plenty more to say from others if not Rafiq.
Isn't there going to be a parliamentary hearing about this too? a Yorkshire Member told me that he thinks there is to be one this month.
Absolutely, I wouldn’t blame him either, without any NDA in place, he’s always got the option of a newspaper interview further down the line. He may as well keep that option open.
The parliamentary hearing is in the 16th November......
Tendulkar playing here was a clear sign that the tradition had been rested.
