Coming from an unbiased point of view (i'm a life long West Indies fan)
This is a genuine question:
What are England cricket fans opinions when players with overseas accents are hailed as national heros?
This is genuinely not a WUM question, i'm wondering if this is a positive sign of multiculurism.
This is not a new thing at all, i recognise guys like Alan Lamb and Graeme Hick in the past, came from colonial countries to represent England.
But does your average cricket fan (if there is such a thing) celebrate a proper "English" hero like a Flintoff as much as they do a Kieswetter? [put ability to aside, imagine both players are identical in skill and it's their accent. or englishness you are judging]
English born - does it matter?
posted on 27/9/11
That's it, i didn't want to do this but i'm blocking you Neon. Goodbye.
posted on 27/9/11
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 27/9/11
I think its time we all WUM filtered Neon. The repetition of your argument base is getting tedious.
posted on 27/9/11
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 27/9/11
But neon, it's the ONLY thing you write about.
Instead of looking for excuses for England's comprehensive victory by using thinly veiled accusations of poaching players 'prepared' by another nation's youth systems, maybe you should be berating your own team for destroying their long term success in the test arena by chasing fast IPL money.
On the point of Potential v Fulfilment, take a look at Vinod Kambli. Lots of players play for the age groups at national level, most of them do not make the step up to the first team, and even fewer have a long career at that level.
I learnt how to play cricket whilst at school in New Zealand until I was 14. It's where I learnt to bowl, bat and field. However, I didn't start to play to anything like my full (albeit limited) potential until I was in my mid 20's.
It's what happens when you develop into an adult that counts.
posted on 27/9/11
This thread has gone in the completely wrong direction from its intention.
My question was do England fans cheer for their adopted internationalists like, Trott or Kieswetter as much as they do their home born internationalists, like Flintoff or Anderson. [putting aside ability, imagine the players are exactly the same in ability]
posted on 27/9/11
Perhaps this thread has gone astray because the question was so stupid.
posted on 27/9/11
If that's the case then i respect your opinion and if it is shared by others then fair enough. I thought it was a genuine question.
posted on 27/9/11
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 28/9/11
Trotty is probably my favourite England batter.
Swanny my favourite bowler, though I admire all the bowlers for the improvements they've found and the work they have put in.
So, doesn't matter to me. Freddie was popular for being a really admirable man, and a fine cricketer, not because he was born in Preston.
The idea of 'Britishness' is pretty played out now. Major corporations control government. They store their money in other countries offering low taxation. Work is outsourced to the third world. Our natural resources and transport has been sold off and is privately owned. Even war is often outsourced.
The 'country' is a played out idea. I find the idea of patriotism weird to be honest. Don't others find it a bit incongruous when they go to the Peaks, or Newcastle, or the Mersey or the City of London, and see that they recognise the same flag as me, in Nottingham?
While the England players are mostly qualified from birth to play from England due to British parentage, I find it a bit quaint when people get animated over the whole issue.