England may be closing the gap on Australia in terms of recent Test victories, but there is one major figure that does not measure up.
 Fletcher and Graveney must meet strict criteria on contracts |
While 25 Australians are centrally contracted by their national board, just 12 players have their salaries paid directly by the England and Wales Cricket Board. Meanwhile South Africa, ranked the second best side in Test cricket, have 18 players under contract.
For both of those countries, the central group includes the first-choice Test side, plus one-day regulars and those identified as stars of the future.
As the contracted players for this summer were announced, England coach Duncan Fletcher made no secret of his desire to equal the Aussies off the field as well as on it.
 |  I think it's important we have a squad of anything between 16 and 20 players |
And he claimed ECB finances would not support his desire for a group of 16 to 20 players in a central pool. But it could be that the strength of domestic cricket's finances is stopping England from contracting a larger group.
"Top county players earn substantial salaries," ECB director of cricket operations John Carr told BBC Sport.
"If they are awarded contracts by England they will expect to be awarded more."
A successful England player who appears in both forms of the game can expect to earn "well in excess" of �250,000.
Fletcher could be allowed to ask for 20 players to be contracted, but only if they meet specific requirements.
A resolution adopted in August 2002 allows for two types of contracts to be handed out, up to a maximum of 20. Twelve-month deals can only be given to players who the selectors are "convinced will play a major part in the year ahead".
Anyone named in a winter touring party gains a contract for the off-season, but six-month contracts are up for grabs in April.
Even then, ECB rules demand selectors must believe a player will have "a meaningful role in the summer international season" to gain one of them.
Former coach David Lloyd's suggestion that highly-rated young spinners could spend April training in India rather than shivering in a pavilion is therefore a non-starter.
And the system favours Test players rather than specialists in one-day internationals, which take place in a three-week block in mid-season.
"If we had 25 players contracted, England would be employing players who are spending the majority of their time with their counties," Carr argues.
The different structure of domestic cricket in England is also a sticking point.
| ENGLAND CONTRACTS Six months:
Steve Harmison
Matthew Hoggard
Simon Jones
Graham Thorpe Twelve months:
James Anderson
Mark Butcher
Paul Collingwood
Andrew Flintoff
Ashley Giles
Nasser Hussain
Michael Vaughan
Marcus Trescothick All expire end of September |
A central contract in the Southern Hemisphere might mean a player is invited to squad training between Tests. But the amount of county cricket means there is very little time for squad get-togethers.
Opinion is divided on the value of rest, but Carr claims counties are generally receptive to requests from England management over non-contracted players.
"It is very rare that a request is not adhered to by counties," he says.
"We compensate counties when players miss matches so that softens the blow.
"The current system is not overly restrictive, although the administration could be more straightforward."
England management may want the team to spend more time together when construction of outdoor nets at the ECB National Academy in Loughborough is completed in 2005.
Until then, the International Teams Management Group, which includes Fletcher, chief selector David Graveney and Academy director Rod Marsh, is in continual discussion.
And while the wins accumulate for the England team, there is unlikely to be that much pressure for change.
MMIX
E-mail this to a friend 
Printable version 
