Vaughan out of India tour...

Merlin wrote:

JKLever wrote:

Merlin wrote:Pringle (with his usual chavness) is pushing for Foster (excellent choice) and Bopara ahead of Ambrose and Shah for the test squad to India.
Todays announcement might just revael KP's preferences.

Yep, whatever the team is it will certainly be a KP pick.

Foster himself has said he doesn't expect to tour India - why would they have given a contract to Ambrose?

I thought neither Ambrose nor Prior were on contracts!

Ambrose is on a so-called 'part-time' contract... a joke

They are incremental contracts.

Its a point system scenario.

holcs wrote:They are incremental contracts.

Its a point system scenario.

Errr ... Okay.

Now explain.

Here you go:

A further seven players have been awarded England increment contracts for the same period:

Tim Ambrose (Warwickshire)
Ravi Bopara (Essex)
Samit Patel (Nottinghamshire)
Matthew Prior (Sussex)
Owais Shah (Middlesex)
Graeme Swann (Nottinghamshire)
Luke Wright (Sussex)

England increment contracts are in line with principles of summer central contracts which were previously awarded to players at the start of the home season whom the selectors believed would play a meaningful role during the domestic international season.

As was the case with summer central contracts, players awarded an increment contract will receive an additional one-off payment from the ECB on top of the salary they receive from their first-class county. Players awarded a 12-month England central contract will continue to be paid by the ECB rather than their county.

Non-contracted players will be able to earn an England increment contract via the introduction of a new points system which will begin this winter. Five points will be awarded for a Test appearance and two for a Twenty20 or ODI appearance with an England increment contract being awarded automatically once a player reaches 20 points during the 12-month contract period.

Stupid arsed system - so a player who played and failed in 3 tests would still get 'points' even if it was blatently obvious he wasn't up to it?

JKLever wrote:Stupid arsed system - so a player who played and failed in 3 tests would still get 'points' even if it was blatently obvious he wasn't up to it?

Yep.
Presume you make reference to .... nah, shan't mention any names!!

Ta Chas ... glad someone can make sense of it!

Thats basically it guys.

Its you get paid for turning up and not for performing. But that is very similar to the Central Contracts we have at the moment anyway from what I understand.