England have dropped Geraint Jones. This is a surprise, because it flies in the face of a longstanding bias amongst the Test selectors in favour of players from the home counties in general, and Kent in particular.
This chart shows what I mean. It plots the number of Test caps won by players from each of the old counties (I'm excluding Durham) since 1946 against the number predicted by a simple two-variable model. The two variables are:
1. A home county dummy. This equals 1 for Essex, Kent, Middlesex and Surrey, and 0 for the others.
2. The number of county championship titles multiplied by a dummy if a county contains a Test ground. Logic tells us that stronger counties - as measured by the number of championships they've won - should produce more Test players. Oddly, though, this is true only of counties with a Test ground.
These two facts alone explain three-quarters of the variation in counties' test caps.
What's even more amazing is the size of the home county effect. The home counties have, on average, 206 more Test caps than other counties. As the average county has only 345 caps, this is a lot.
However, Kent have produced even more caps than this effect would predict - 611, against a predicted 423.
This, I guess confirms what fans outside London have always suspected - there's a bias towards (spit) southern players.
Another thing: did I mention that I don't have a girlfriend?
Good for you - an anti-London obsession is far healthier than some of your others. P.S. Have I explained to you why we should move the UK capital to Berwick?
Posted by: dearieme | July 31, 2006 at 03:19 PM
"P.S. Have I explained to you why we should move the UK capital to Berwick?"
On the North bank of the river of course.
Posted by: David Farrer | July 31, 2006 at 03:34 PM
Of course: easier for the Farrer tanks to reach it?
Posted by: dearieme | July 31, 2006 at 03:50 PM
Chris, there has always been and not only in cricket. What about the rugby, my other beloved sport? and yet this is surely understandable - bigger population centre, more demographically upper middle etc.
Posted by: james higham | August 01, 2006 at 08:15 AM
Chris, I want to run you as blogger of the day tomorrow but not being able to find an e-mail, I have to use this platform to reach you. oasis@mi.ru, in case you're interested.
Not to put too fine a point on it, I need info on you.
Posted by: james higham | August 01, 2006 at 08:18 AM
Why exclude Durham?
2. In the last 30 years the number of test matches played has skyrocketed, so much so that if a player plays for England, the county will be lucky if that player plays for them 3 or 4 times in a season.
Hence, if several of your players are called up to England you are unlikely to win the Championship, if you have the best players, you don't get to keep them.
Posted by: Sam | August 01, 2006 at 09:16 AM
Makes a change for a bias to go in Kent's favour, says this "Man of Kent". Kent's extensive poor areas (Sheppey, Thanet etc) tend not to get the government money reserved for the north and north of the border. So at least we've got the cricketers to cheer about...
Posted by: Bruce | August 02, 2006 at 05:25 PM
Hola faretaste
mekodinosad
Posted by: AnferTuto | July 29, 2007 at 02:12 PM