THERE have been developments in the last couple of weeks regarding the case of Blake Reed – a 22-year-old Australian playing second team cricket for Frinton-On-Sea Cricket Club in the Two Counties Cricket League in the East Anglia and North Essex region.

These could have repercussions for players from overseas wanting to play cricket in the UK, and more than 100 players still in the country with the incorrect visas for playing recreational cricket.

Frinton had been deducted points by the Two Counties League (TCL) in July for playing Reed in contravention of his visa status, the England Cricket Board (ECB) having previously instructed leagues to take action in theses cases.

There had been suggestions a court case could follow, but it is possible this was replaced by an appeal heard by a barrister and two solicitors.

When Frinton were originally notified of action against them, they sought to take out an injunction on the TCL to compel them to allow Reed to play.

But, after the TCL management board – all of whom are volunteers – called a vote of confidence from the league over the matter, threatening to resign on block if they were defeated and expel Frinton if they were backed, the club and league agreed to the appeal process as a compromise. Both parties accepted its conclusions as final and binding.

At the Appeal Tribunal, both parties, Frinton CC and Blake, and the TCL management sub-committee were represented by solicitors, the TCL by the ECB solicitors, although it has not been revealed who paid the costs.

Curiously neither Blake nor Frinton CC attended the appeal, which left certain questions posed by the tribunal regarding Blake’s employment and other matters unanswered.

The tribunal ruled that Reed should be considered a professional as he had represented Western Australia at Under-19 level, even though the Western Australia Cricket Association provided evidence he was no longer part of system, and evidence was also supplied that he works as a labourer in both the UK and Australia.

This is entirely consistent with the advice provided to clubs and leagues by the ECB since last autumn.

It is not thought Frinton will continue taking legal action, both parties having agreed to abide by the decision beforehand, but it is possible the player may take action against the league, for allowing him to register and travel to the UK before ruling him ineligible, and against the Home Office.

The case against the Home Office would be on the basis for the original court case which should have been heard last month, that as an overseas player he has been discriminated against as a UK player with a similar representative cricket background would have been allowed to play.

However, someone will have to fund the legal action and as the player is presumably due to return to Australia next month this could be the end of the road legally for a while.

The Home Office itself did not come out of the tribunal very well, being accused of a lack of clarity and leadership and of failing to give the tribunal any real assistance.

So where does this leave clubs and leagues? The ECB will be meeting with leagues around the country in September prior to a further meeting with the Home Office, which begs the question why was there not a similar consultation 12 months ago if the leagues have any real influence?

It is now being claimed the restrictions over the past season was to prove greater opportunities for UK players, but in which case why only ban certain categories of player and not others?