It varies between counties.

The full county cap is awarded to a player when they have, usually, become an established first team player that contributes positively and consitantly to the teams performance.

Some clubs award a cap on championship bedut and dont have the distinction between capped and uncapped players.

Warwickshire give players a second team cap, the yellow bear and the first team cap is a White bear.

What is the benefit to the player in receiving his cap other than prestige?

It helps with contract negociations!

On merit at WCCC.

LeicesterExile wrote:

What is the benefit to the player in receiving his cap other than prestige?

Pay rise, company car, a benefit year eventually, etc

A capped player will have been recognised as having made significant contributions to the team enough to be considered in the pecking order for first team selection. It is to say you have reached a certain standard and of course it comes iwht more money and I would think, a sponsored car.

It’s quite odd though how and who get their caps though. It took OHD a long time to get his but did I see correctly that some of our recent overseas players got given one on debut? I may be mistaken.

Not the full county cap.

Players like Sam Hain and OHD were will the club several years before they were awarded their first team cap.

Interview with Yates on the official website.
https://edgbaston.com/news/yates-believes-hampshire-victory-shows-promising-future/

No acknowledgement from him that his performance over the season was not at an acceptable standard, unless he accepts that and makes changes he'll repeat the failures next season.

He is very lucky indeed to have a 3 year contract, especially when players who did better than him, in less games were forced out of the club.

Think that's a bit harsh personally. He was messed about as much as anyone last season. They tried him as a three to bring in Davies to open with Sibley I'm guessing with the intention of increasing our run rate early in the innings. Davies and Sibley kept getting out and Yates did struggle in the three slot. Hain coming in at four is 4-5 years ahead of Yates in experience.

Yates caught the eye of England selection in 2021 so there's no way Bears were gonna let him go after one lousy season. I'm actually glad they don't chop players on this basis. Yates has potential to improve and go on to plough big runs in first class cricket and still has time on his side for higher recognition potentially.

For all the gnashing of teeth over Matt Lamb let's be fair he's just had a decent first half to two thirds of one season after not exactly pulling up any trees prior to or during Covid and I'd have kept him too but his potential isn't the same.

I think it's quite likely Lamb's situation is a victim of the schedule in recent seasons being such a dogs dinner. Had we an appointment to view schedule going forwards (with ideally IMHO Friday T20 and 16 championship games starting on Sunday's) as a squad player he'd be invaluable. The chunking up of the season into blocks and the recruitment of all these T20 specialists means for Lamb, given his relatively limited potential compared to some of the other youngsters and him not being a slip catcher of any note nor much of a bowler makes his retention a bit of a 50/50 punt.

I'd still have kept him but can sort of understand the need to trim the squad means sometimes half-decent middle order batters (with few other strings to their bow) or basically squad players have to reluctantly be let go. Good luck to the lad at Derby and to Adam Hose (who might consider himself equally unfortunate) at Worcestershire