I've had a quick look at our stats. Kieswetter, Lumb, KP and Morgan between them scored 790 runs during the tournament. The other 8 players used during the tournament scored 218 runs!! Having said that, and in the fairness of balance, those 4 saw more time in the middle than the others with the exception of Collingwood, and on the wickets front it was 36-0 in favour of the English players.

I take your point Davo, and I have no idea on the background of the Saffers, so it may well be they've been here since they were in nappies (obviously KP wasn't), but I did find myself hoping that it would be Collingwood who hit the winning runs.

On the Hargreaves point though Dave, if football rules were applied to cricket, Morgan would not be allowed to play for us having already represented Ireland. I realise similar things happen in other sports (there have been a few rugby players who've represented teams like the Somoas and then switched to NZ), but it does seem strange that you can pick and switch your country.

Having said all that, great to see us win. Unlucky to lose to WI in the first game, then Ireland was probably our only dodgy performance of the tournament. After that, we played well in all areas. Also good to see that KP seems to have have returned to form, and finally learnt how to play T20.

Kieswetter has a Scottish mother and lived in SA till his teens, but that is all I know about his background.

Ok, fair point. Hadn't considered that.

Dirk Nannes has played for Holland.

I don't care 'cos we're world champions and it's not like we have broken any rules, but I just don't get how you can be born and live in a country until you are 18, live in England for 4 years, but because your Grandparents are Scottish, you qualify for England. Doesn't make sense but not breaking any rules.

World Champions Baby!

Interesting to read all of the comments. I think that people sometimes take a simplistic view of the idea of nationality. My guess is that most fans don't have an issue with Lumb playing for England on account of the fact he has an English parent and on top of that his old man used to open for Yorkshire! He had a choice of two countries and chose us. Good for him.

Kieswetter is a more divisive subject: Yup, he played at U19 level for the Saffers but came to England a while ago and has had a British passport all his life (dual nationality via his Mum). Played for Somerset and did his A-Levels at Millfield. Millfield is arguably the most English place in the entire world!!! Dave McGrath wanted a job there but had no chance because he's Scottish. Seriously though, if he considers England to be his adopted country then why shouldn't he play for them? He'd have had a bloody good shot at getting into the SA side if he wanted to, as Boucher is already 167 years old and will be retiring soon. Ultimately, he made his choice and felt that he wanted to represent England. I welcome that and it isn't for me to second guess his eligibility or motivation for doing so.

KP's just ace! English mother, English wife, English tattoo! That'll do for me. Maybe I'm just easily pleased?

In my opinion to play for England you should either have been born in England (or Wales) or have an English parent. As previously stated KP comes into that catagory although Kieswetter does not. Didn't Vinnie Jones get to play football for Wales because his Grandad was born there? A bit stupid if you ask me.

Dave seems to suggest that Kieswetter does have an English Mum??

She's Scottish according to Wiki.

These rules are the same across pretty much every sport (with minor differences) and have been for many years with the odd adaptation (consider the case of Basil D'Olivera in the 60s). There are good reasons for this, even more so today with the fact that people do change their nationality or citizenship and the fact that there is a huge amount more movement between countries and continents. By your reckoning, a kid that moves to England with his parents at a very young age should not be allowed to grow up dreaming of playing for the country where he has spent virtually all his life - I could name a few people that I've known for quite a few years that fall into that bracket (though obviously none of them are good enough to play for England in any sport) and would imagine that I'm not alone in that.

Ultimately, this is how the world - Britain especially - is these days. Shouldn't we just welcome people who choose to adopt our country? Or is it better to whinge at them and tell them to go home? Bear in mind that all of our cricketers have full time jobs in this country and did so before they were selected for England - bit unfair to expect them to give that up to represent a country they don't even live in.

Just like the D&L system!

Maybe they could add a rule that if you have lived in England from a certain age (Definitely under 18) and for a certain amount of time. You are eligable. I just want to stop further instances similar to that of the Kenyan athletes.