https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/57843984

In a BBC Interview, Mark Robinson talks about giving some University players a chance to earn a Bears contract, by playing in the Royal London Cup. I guess this would include the likes of Kiel van Vollenhoven and possibly Matt Montgomery, who did so well in helping the 2nd's win their T20 Final (though he was with Notts). I know a few on here have not been happy with giving opportunities to young South Africans, but I would welcome the chance to improve our back up squad. It would be interesting to see what other University players might be playing.

If a player qualifies for a British passport they are British, regardless of where they lived as a child.

Highveld wrote:

If a player qualifies for a British passport they are British, regardless of where they lived as a child.

Think this is true to an extent. But when those players have failed to make it as a pro in SA, one even captaining the SA U19’s I believe, that’s a different story than pitching up here because their parents moved.
I appreciate there are some serious political barriers to many of these players, but when did Warwickshire, or even county cricket become a charity to support young South African cricketers and address those issues?
What can’t be denied is that if these players are picked, local Warwickshire or English players who have lived their whole lives in this country lose out. Which undermines the academy system.
You might have a real gem on your hands; but you don’t know what players you have until you give them an opportunity, but that’s impossible to know if that opportunity is blocked.
And whether it’s a cliche or not, that opportunity should be prioritised for the player that’s come through the academy since he was 9 and has dreamed of this, not a player that would be just as happy at any of the other 17 counties, and is just as likely to walk away if he gets a better offer elsewhere.

Agreed

To follow that line of thinking, were we wrong to have given opportunities to, amongst others Dougie Brown, Trevor Penney, Neil Carter, Sam Hain, Roger Twose, Jonathan Trott and Jacob Bethel?

Surely Kolpak players were denying English players employment and opportunities, are you opposed to them? How about overseas players?
Who are all British, but did not come through the clubs academy.

First things first, despite what anyone says, having a British passport simply means that player has the right to work in Britain. It doesn’t mean they have a right to equal opportunity or access to the clubs resources. That’s an active choice the club makes. The club could equally choose to not play anyone who has failed in SA and come over here because they have that right.
I would argue, that choice, means the club contributed to the club failing to meet its corporate social responsibilities and obligations to the community, and those who have grown up locally, and have invested time in the clubs infrastructure. Which many would argue is almost as big a purpose of the club as winning, especially considering it’s recent poor history of producing talent and it’s inability to maximise the talent within Birmingham. You could also point out that the club after all, does receive funding in part to produce local talent, which this process jeopardises.

Secondly, it seems to be an ever increasing phenomenon, of young South African players moving elsewhere. It’s become a matter of scale and what is reasonable. Again it’s nothing against them personally, but their presence removes opportunity for others. And the issue is that it’s a one way street, citizenship or overseas rules elsewhere mean that British players can’t go elsewhere. This is their only option.
Now 1 or 2 every couple of years given a chance, no issue. Those players you’ve mentioned, 7 over a 30+ year period. But as I said it’s a matter of scale, it would be 3 or 4 that have played for the twos this year alone, and seem in line to play in the RLODC. I wouldn’t be surprised if every other county has similar numbers in second teams and potentially playing in the RLODC. Then another 3 or 4 next year?
Just physically how can a 16 year old compete for an opportunity with an 18/19 year old, so their development is stunted, potentially permanently, because of an easy short term option.
And for the record yes, I was hugely against KOLPAKs, I thought it was absolute nonsense, created an attitude and a group of mercenary players willing to play for the highest bidder, that actually often had little to no long term benefit to a club. It was a system far too easy to abuse, and yes blocked opportunities for young British players. There are of course exceptions, and some were wonderful servants to clubs. But on the whole it was a legal loop hole, that was manipulated by players and clubs to get ready made players cheaper than investing long term in their own youngsters. Clubs have a responsibility not just to themselves but the game as a whole, and these sort of short term decisions endanger the growth and sustainability of the game in this country.

We actually agree on Kolpak's, fortunately Warwickshire only had one Kolpak (Heath Streak), as far as I can remember, and he'd originally been signed as an overseas player. Some counties had several at the same time.

Fortunately Warwickshire are now giving home produced young players a good chance to play, just look at the young players given a chance this season Henry & Ethan Brookes, Dan Mousley, Rob Yates, Matt Lamb & Ed Pollock at first team level, while the second team has given several academy players a chance, including Roshan Balaji, the young leg spinner from Attock (Ali Tanvir) and the batsman who got the hundred last week.Injuries, COVID and England call ups mean that all counties are having to look outside their contracted staffs to raise teams, so it seems sensible that the club takes a look at players who may be able to fill a need, eg Chris Benjamin took advantage of the opportunity to fill the role for a back up keeper.

In an ideal world we'd have a side full of locally born and developed all england qualified players, sadly the world isn't ideal.
What the coaching staff have to consider though is if Malan isn't available for the end of the championship season, what is better, giving our own players a chance, or spending a fortune on a short term overseas player with no commitment and who fails to deliver.

So, I have a question for you (apologies I’m assuming you’re South African by the name). I’ve spent large amounts of time in South Africa. I love the country, I hate what it’s doing to itself currently in Gauteng and KZN.
I’ve always thought the biggest loser in all this is South African cricket. If you look at the talent drain, and the national teams performance vs South African qualified talent spread around the world.
Can you see it being fixed from the South African side any time soon, or is it so political, that CSA stands no chance?

Hi

Not south African, but an admirer of South African cricketers all my life.

From what I've seen on various news outlets, and from talking to South Africans, including those running businesses. The situation is political, and regardless of what CSa do, while quota systems are in place the situation won't improve. Like most places though, the majority of the population just want a safe and stable life, however political extremists make that impossible.

There's much that could be said about the quota system in South Africa; but at least it is an improvement on the system that was in place for most of the 20th century when the quotas were Whites 100%, everyone else 0%.