KEY POINTS:
Attempts to name a replacement for Hamish Marshall have hit a sticky wicket.
Marshall turned down one of New Zealand Cricket's coveted 20 central contracts on June 14 and a replacement was expected to be made early last week. However, no announcement was forthcoming.
Those left waiting to see if they will fill the void left by Marshall, who just inked a four-year mega-pound deal with Gloucestershire - have been prodding about in a corridor of uncertainty.
The Herald on Sunday has learned that the selectors have put forward a name that has raised eyebrows in some quarters. There was no comment from Players' Association manager Heath Mills, who has to sign off on the deal, other than to say: "There's a process we're working through."
Black Caps manager Lindsay Crocker added to the intrigue when he said: "It's taking a little bit longer than we'd hoped. They [the selectors] have someone in mind but it's a matter of working through the process."
Another meeting is planned for Monday at which it is hoped agreement can be reached.
There can be only two plausible explanations for the failure to sign off the contract: the selectors have swapped a batsman for a bowler, or the selectors have bypassed a batsman higher on the rankings list for one lower. Both scenarios would clearly give the Players' Association cause for concern.
While 20 players only are awarded contracts - ranging from $125,000 to $45,000 - the selectors also rank players from 21 to 25.
In normal circumstances No 21 would fill the void but in this case it could be Daryl Tuffey and the normal practice is to swap like for like - that is to say, Marshall with another middle-order batsman.
You can assume the next middle-order batsman on the list is Mathew Sinclair, considering he was told he had narrowly missed out on a place in the 20. If he has been passed over for a batsman lower on the list, or not on the list of 25 at all, there would be an obvious grievance case that Mills and the NZCPA would be forced to deal with.
Marshall's defection piqued the interest of Sinclair, however, the Central Districts No 4 said he had heard nothing.
"In this case I think no news is bad news," Sinclair told the Herald on Sunday. "I've had no communication at all. I would have expected to have heard one way or the other on Monday."
The 31-year-old has indicated he was looking at overseas opportunities but would almost certainly stay if he was on a retainer.
He has become an outspoken critic of a contract system he feels does not give enough weight to test specialists such as himself, particularly when there have been so few test matches in recent years compared with one-day internationals.
