I wish someone at the ECB would explain why not allowing Mushtaq Ahmed to play for Sussex this season is going to harm the development of grassroots cricket in this country.

I suppose it's fair enough that the ECB have fallen into line with governing bodies throughout the world in turning their noses up at the Indian Cricket League in favour of its mega-bucks rival the Indian Premier League.

After all, they all stand to gain when the IPL start dishing out some of the $2million the competition is expected to generate.

England's elite players have everything to gain financially, too, when the IPL organises its schedule next year so that the likes of Andrew Flintoff and Kevin Pietersen are free to dip their bread.

For starters, the timing of the ECB's decision is wrong. The ICL have already held one competition in October when four English players - Paul Nixon, Darren Maddy, Chris Read and Vikram Solanki - were allowed to take part without fear of sanction.

If the ECB were going to prevent players competing in the ICL from taking part in domestic cricket why could they have not said so then?

It would have not have left Sussex in a situation where they might have less than a month to line up a replacement for Mushtaq, should his ban be upheld.

Also, on what grounds do they categorise the ICL as an unauthorised competition and, as such, decree that any overseas player taking part should not be allowed to ply his trade in this country?

And is it not a touch hypocritical of them to condemn the ICL as unauthorised when Mike Gatting, the man now responsible for developing the first-class game at Lord's, once led a rebel tour to South Africa?

I do not see the harm in allowing the likes of Mushtaq to put a few more rupees in his pension pot by taking part.

He is not going to play international or even domestic cricket in Pakistan again. Sussex has been his club and his club only for the past four years or more.

The extra publicity he has brought to the game - not just in Sussex - cannot be measured in pounds, shillings and pence.

Also, rather than hindering grassroots development, one of the reasons the ECB have cited for imposing their ban, who can deny that Mushtaq has actually encouraged it in this part of the country?

He has regularly held coaching clinics around the county to help nurture the next generation of English spinners and you only have to see the number of youngsters in their Mushtaq shirts practising flippers and googlies on the outfield at Hove during the summer to measure the impact he has had.

Mushtaq apart, the way the global game has embraced the cash-rich Indian Premier League will have massive repercussions on domestic cricket.

The most likely scenario is that players of his quality will not grace the county game in the future.

Why should an Adam Gilchrist or Ricky Ponting, for instance, slog their guts around England for five months when they can earn five times the amount a county might pay them for a few weeks of hit and giggle in India?

As one former international put it this week: "An IPL contract can be the difference between retiring at 35 and 65."

If that is the case, surely it can only be good for the development of English players if they are regularly exposed to world-class bowlers like Mushtaq and Shane Bond, who is likely to be prevented from joining Hampshire for the crime of joining the ICL.

Finally, there is even speculation that the start of our county season in 2009 might be delayed so that it does not clash with the IPL.

Which, if true, does not show a lot of regard for our flagship domestic competition.

Do you think Mushy will be banned?