Ireland v Bangladesh Test status

First topic message reminder :

Should Ireland replace Bangladesh in the ICC full member Test team list, or at least join the top ten.

Since their inclusion in 2000, Bangladesh have only won three Test matches, one against Zimbabwe and two against the West Indies who at the time were crippled by a players strike. Thirty four of their defeats have been by an innings.

They just never seem to improve in the Test arena, which some blame on the fact that there is a lack of first class cricket in Bangladesh which will not change any time soon.

Unless Ireland are given the same chance that Bangladesh were, we will miss out on some of the good players that Ireland have in the big arena.

Maybe it has something to do with cricket Ireland's infrastructure or maybe a money angle,or maybe they do not want it yet, i am not sure, but i would like for them to be given a shot.

Eyetoldyouso wrote:Mike Selig

You make lots of good points regarding concentration levels and work for a fielder in T20. Personally I think that you are guilty of exaggeration for effect.
Compare the position of an opening (or top order batsman) in Test & T20. I would hazard an educated guess that its an awful lot easier to make a quick fire 30 in T20 than a decent innings in Test cricket. For example, facing a fast bowler with up to 4 slips & a possibly 2 gullies and hoping that your team can bat for at least 1.5 days (5 sessions). The bowlers able to work up a real head of steam bowling 6-8 consecutive overs only to be replaced by another one ready to do the same and then the no 1 bowler returning. Having seen off the quickies, lets see how you deal with a spinner with men round the bat.
So, fielding might be more physically demanding in T20 but that's about it. Woe betide the slipper in Test cricket who drops what might be the only chance he gets all day.

I personally find batting for a day a lot easier than bashing a quick 30. But that's empirical evidence. I agree that Test cricket is a bigger test of batting technique and concentration. But T20 requires its own skills as well. Let's see how you deal with needing 12 an over with all your main scoring areas blocked.

The challenges of the two formats are different, but I see no reason for some people's statements that test cricket is obviously the hardest. It follows from snobbery, and isn't backed up by the players' views (in my experience).

I certainly find coaching T20 a real challenge. Enjoyable, fun, but a challenge.

Being Irish, I would love an Irish test team, but currently it is not feasible. Ireland are probably the frontrunners of the associate teams but even so we are a while away yet. However, I would like to see a clearer path to gaining test-membership.

Mike Selig wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

There would be no promotion/relegation between any of the divisions. What there would be would be a list of set criteria for a side to achieve Test status. These may include a First class system, structure of the board and the ability to continue to produce good players rather than just having one "golden generation". Possibly other things aswell, Mike is more educated than me in knowing what is required to play Test cricket. A side would make a formal application to play "Test" cricket, which would be a title reserved for division 1, and the ICC would review it in comparison to the criteria. It wouldn't be done by a vote, it would be done by an independent panel made up of cricket experts.

Obviously this would only work if the ICC had complete transparency in it's dealings and could be trusted to work on the say so of all boards, not one

The second paragraph is the key.

The first paragraph is about what is in place now. Unfortunately it leads to decisions being made on political rather than sporting grounds. And I completely disagree with calling only one division "test" cricket. Does any other sport do this? Is a football game between two division 2 sides given a lesser name?

Mike, the problem I have with calling a second tier of nations playing 5 day cricket is that what if one player stands out and perhaps ends up with a Test match batting average of nearly 70 or 80, but only because he is playing against lesser nations. That demeans the achievements of Bradman etc. and I don't want to see that happen.

I have watched a bit of bangladesh vs pakistan over the past couple of weeks and i can easily come to the conclusion that Bangladesh dont deserve test status , i might be offending bangladeshis but its the truth , i guess ireland are a better side than bangladesh . what do you think ,
all bangla has got is a couple of good players thats all

Just merged this here cricketfan

[quote="cricketfan"] I have watched a bit of bangladesh vs pakistan over the past couple of weeks and i can easily come to the conclusion that Bangladesh dont deserve test status , i might be offending bangladeshis but its the truth , i guess ireland are a better side than bangladesh . what do you think ,
all bangla has got is a couple of good players thats all[/quote]

Well for whatever reason their standard has dropped significantly and they need to build again to get their one day and test side back to competing.

It's embarrassing to see them playing minor county level cricket in a home series.

Since the WC Bangladesh have played so poorly that I think Hodge's team could give them a run for their money

Current Test match; BD 135ao Pak 525-4, and still going.

Pakistan probably should have declared ages ago, especially against this weak BD team.
But I suppose it is one way to get your averages up

thing is just coz bangladesh have regressed and are looking really bad atm doesn't justify ireland getting test status when they are likely to be just as bad

said a few times that the ICC need to look at how they help the so-called developing cricket nations , just throwing money at bangladesh clearly hasn't helped. the other full members need to take more responsibility imo and things like having more A Team tours to places like bangladesh and ireland, inviting them to take part in triangular ODI series instead of just having bi-lateral series after a test series and getting their players some proper experience of playing against the bigger teams is needed instead of just the odd game here and there.

only way these teams and players are going to improve is by playing more regularly against better teams.

Well the debates over, it seems that Ireland are actually walking the walk and not just talking a lot of hot air.

Ireland announce plans to apply for Test status

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/16698328.stm
http://www.rte.ie/sport/cricket/2012/0124/cricket.html

With plans like these in place, we may well have another nation with Test match status by 2020, good luck to them

Good on them.

2020 would seem a rather ironic year to start playing test cricket though!

Yep, all the best to them.

Where is Skyeman, by the way, can't recall seeing him about lately.

Resurecting this off the back of this game http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc-intercontinental-cup-2015-17/engine/match/1040501.html and Balgladeshes recent success (albeit modest).

Now of course Ireland may well have improved rather than regressing as they have done if they had been given the backing and satus that Bangladesh had...and they are missing some qualified players they simply cant afford/tempt to play "second class" internationals.

But as is the argument that theyve earnt the right to test status on the field is well and truely lost at the moment.

The question should maybe start shifting to Afghanistan who continue to push on as a force.

Afghanistan have destroyed Ireland in their intercontitnetal cup clash

Ireland have plummeted to 15th in the T20 rankings (behind the mighty Hong Kong) and languish bottom in the ODI rankings...hard to know where theyd be if there was a broader range of teams included in those of course.

It does make you wonder if there was a missed opportunity when Irish cricket was riding a wave of historic success, or if that was really built on a house of cards. Still relying on guys like Ed Joyce (now 38) doesnt exactly bode well for the next generation. Losing other chaps like Boyd Rankin and Morgan has set the precedent for others to

Afghanistan though should be pretty happy with that. The Ireland side is made up mostly of County players with far more first class experience (Joyce alone has played more than the entire Afghan side combined), including Dockerell who England have sniffed around. Yeah UAE pitches and yeah spinners but really the scale of the victory shows that Afghan should be able to at least compete with the weaker tests nations ...and frankly England would be terriried of facing their leggies.

Rashid Khan ...18 year old took 8/143...the same guy that destroyed the Lions a few months ago taking 12 /122 in his only first class game to date (not sure on the status of the Intercontinental cup games? Cricinfos not included it in his stats)
Averages 16 in ODIs, 13 in T20s. Bats a bit too. Sure hes largely played low level games (althoughg his T20 record includes most of the test playing teams) but if this is the type of cricketer Afghanistan is producing then England really need to start encouraging spinning pitches on the county scene so they can poach him on residency

The rise of Afghanistan is pretty remarkable and shows what can be acheived with fairly modest investement in professionalising relatively small group of well motivated individuals. Bangladesh have turned themselves around in a similar fashion too by being pretty brutal with selection and favouring a young players with the right attitude and commitment.

Afghanistan sit above Zibabwe and Ireland in the ODI rankings, and above Bangladesh at 9th in the T20s. Exactly the level that Ireland reached at the height of the calls for them to be given test status.

Im not sure it would really benefit Afghansitan in the short term, though, whether they have the player base to sustains comeptitive squads in 3 formats even if it did bring additional funding and power. They certainly would benefit from more matches with the higher ranked teams though rather than having to borer themselves endlessly crushing the associates and Zimbabwe.

The balance of power at the associate level has shifted a lot in 5 years.

The idea of having "levels" is a ridiculous one - if you're going to restrict teams then do it in a league type system with promotions/relegations. Afghanistan are probably the 9th, maybe even 8th best team in the world right now, but don't get to play the big boys because of this class system - yet we still have Zimbabwe in the top "class" despite them making zero progress for like a decade at least

BCCI are trying to push clauses that will allow members full status to be revoked, Bangladesh understandably are unhappy with this ... but Zimbabwe provide a good counter argument for why this needs to be a thing. And if it increases the chances of rising boards like Afghanistan getting to step up when ready then thats anotehr positive.

The problem I forsee if BCCI do get their way is that it will be used even more by them as a way of leveraging support from the weaker board members, giving them the powere to thereaten their status if they dont support their policies. Currently that policy is that they should get even more of the money. Sigh.


Ireland also stand to loose out further from the current proposals.

BCCI gets 570 Million annually and ICC is trying to downgrade it to 400 Million.....

and BCCI is doing whatever they can and need to...to retain the 570M.....which any normal "business entity" would...

the problem was in granting the Big-3 the big chunks...once they taste blood, it's hard to reverse

Apologies Id only scan read, I thought it was the other way round that they were trying to increase their share.

Gooseberry wrote:Apologies Id only scan read, I thought it was the other way round that they were trying to increase their share.

Basically the proposal to reign in the big 3 hits India's cashflow rather more than England & Aus (everybody else gets more, including the ICC's paying-the-staff-slush-funds operating budgets, and England & Aus don't lose much). So India are understandably a bit peeved by it, even though they acknowledge that the original Big 3 grab was unfair in the 1st place