All Out Cricket's Discussion Of The Week - Do Ireland Deserve A Chance At Test Level?

This week on www.alloutcricket.com Chris Airey speaks to Boyd Rankin about his ambitions to play for England.

http://www.alloutcricket.com/blogs/interviews-blogs/rankin-points-to-test-ambition

With plenty of young talent now coming to the fore, and an increasingly impressive record in ODI cricket, is it time for Ireland to be given a chance over five days?

yes, but they won't get it for political reasons (for some reason India are terrified they will side with England on every issue - how little they understand the Irish!). I'll leave the floor to Mike to tell us more, and sit back and enjoy the show

Ha, about as much chance of Tibet siding with China on matters of international free-will than Ireland siding with England.

To answer the question, I believe that Ireland should certainly be given an opportunity to qualify for Test eligibility.

Bangladesh and Zimbabwe haven't shown a great deal of improvement for some time now, and with Ireland's recent rise it might just be their time to see whether they can grasp the privileges of Test cricket and excel because of them.

Play-off's in say three different regions (to cover all conditions) over the space of a year between the three sides would be a good way of deciding it. The two winners then get granted Test immunity for 4 years before the playoffs are held again between the highest ranking associate nation and the two lowest ranking Test nations. All a bit 'pie in the sky' but I'm sure something like that could work if meticulously planned.

Right:

First of all, can I just say I'm not Rankin's biggest fan:
“My first aim at the minute is to play Test cricket with England" kinda says it all, but this has to take the biscuit:
"obviously I still play for Ireland when I can"
That's big of him.

Anyway besides the point.

Ireland enquired about full membership for the first time after the World cup in 2007. They were told (I paraphrase) "given the balls-up we made with Bangladesh, we won't award it to you on the basis of a single tournament" (where it has to be said, they far outperformed Bangladesh's win - I debated putting that in inverted commas - in 99). Fair enough, so they carried on their excellent development process (Ireland regularly win under-age tournaments and qualify for U19 world cups), improved further and this time made an official enquiry, I believe after the T20 tournament in England (where it should be noted, they at one stage looked like upsetting Sri Lanka).

The problem was that by this stage the ICC had reached its current format. 75 % of the revenue are distributed to the full members, and the existing full members weren't willing to reduce their share of the pie by adding another full member. Moreover as MfC points out, the two big players in world cricket (England and India, who don't get on all that well, but at least managed to agree on Ireland) weren't enamoured with the idea, India because they were afraid Ireland would side with England, and England because, well, you work it out.

So Ireland were told that they needed a first class system in place in order to gain full membership. Whilst this may seem reasonable, it is for Ireland in the short term unfeasible. They only at the moment have 12 (? to be checked, but fairly sure it's fewer than 20) contracted players. And realistically only 3 of the 4 provinces play cricket actively (for some reason, the ICC seems to think 4 teams constitutes a first class tournament, but 3 teams wouldn't).

Since then, a lot has been made of the fact that Ireland have publicly backed the decision, and admitted they're not ready for test status yet.

Anyway, Ireland have recently announced their intention (and backed it up with a strategic plan, these seem to be all the rage at the moment) to gain test status by 2020. Good luck to them (possibly by then the ICC will have decided that any team whose logo is a clover is not entitled to apply for test status, or maybe the Woolf review will do its job, and 2020 will then seem amazingly pessimistic) with that.

With regards to standards, it's no secret I believe Ireland could easily compete with Bangladesh in a test match. If you look at Ireland's first team, it could looks like: Porterfield, Stirling, Joyce, O'Brien, Wilson, Morgan, O'Brien, Mooney, Dockrell, Johnston and Rankin. Guys like Andrew White, Andre Botha are also decent cricketers. Guys like Sorensen, Connell, are coming through the ranks. Granting Ireland test status will also raise the profile of the game there, and do much to correct the closed shop image the ICC currently has.

At the moment it is a vicious cycle: the test playing members get all the money, and are on the whole improving at a much greater rate than the non-test-playing nations (that would be more than 90% of cricket playing countries). That Ireland have somehow managed to buck the trend is testimony to the dedication and quality of the guys working there (a few of which I am lucky enough to have met). They deserve better than ever moving goal-posts, and politicising of a sporting decision.

And frankly, they deserve better than Rankin.

How about give Ireland a 3 match Test Series against Bangladesh? The winners get Test Status, the losers don't. It's harsh but Bangladesh have surely had their chance and have failed to do anything of note so ... give Ireland a go!

won't happen, Bangladesh back India so however rubbish they may become they'll keep test status for that reason if no other (it was the only real reason they were given it in the first place anyway).

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Bangladesh back India

Ah but for how long...? An interesting rumour is that Bangaldesh's new best buddies are Pakistan (apparently Pakistan gave them a loan or something in exchange for Bangladesh agreeing to tour there, which has caused quite a fuss as now no one seems to think that's a good idea - well it isn't but hey it's not the worst idea I've ever heard either). And Pakistan and India aren't always eye to eye.

The main problem is to change anything, you need 7 out of 10 full members to agree. India won't. Sri Lanka's finances are in such a mess, all India need to do is promise to tour there sometime and then Sri Lanka will definitely back India. West Indies ditto. This leaves very little margin for error.

No. The quality of test cricket needs to be maintained. Bangladesh was a mistake by the ICC - why would anyone want a repeat?

Test status by 2020 is a little more realistic, mind. Right now, they simply aren't ready.

Particularly after getting their backsides handed to them by Namibia...

Yes, T20 I know.

Fists of Fury wrote:Particularly after getting their backsides handed to them by Namibia...

Yes, T20 I know.

They lost by 4 runs... Hardly a crunching defeat.

88Chris05 wrote:No. The quality of test cricket needs to be maintained. Bangladesh was a mistake by the ICC - why would anyone want a repeat?

Test status by 2020 is a little more realistic, mind. Right now, they simply aren't ready.

I'd agree with that.

Tests should last for 5 days if possible but would Ireland be able to bat for 2 days in both ininngs? Probably not on most occasions.

Plus, who would pay to watch this? Not me.

I wouldn't pay to watch them, in honesty. Chris does have a valid point whereby Tests should be just that, a test. Ultimately any match involving Ireland would likely be too big of a test for them, and too little of a test for their opposition.

2020 seems about right, though there is of course the counter-argument that Bangladesh and Zimbabwe play Tests, who aren't too much better (but still better, in my view).

Fists of Fury wrote:
2020 seems about right, though there is of course the counter-argument that Bangladesh and Zimbabwe play Tests, who aren't too much better (but still better, in my view).

How can anyone tell, they never play each-other?

In fact the whole "test" status thing is a nonsense, but let's not go there.

Anyone watching Kenya-Scotland, you should it's a good game.

I like watching top quality cricket, not Kenya vs Scotland.

I know there are many that will watch a village game on TV if they could but not me.

Depends what you mean by "top quality" I suppose...

Compared to what the vast majority of cricketers will ever play in their lifetime, I would call this top quality. Certainly better to watch than England-West Indies on those flat wickets...

Anyway I'm part of those who would watch a village game if I could, so...

Mike Selig wrote:Anyway I'm part of those who would watch a village game if I could, so...

So would I laid in a field with a picnic but not on telly.

To be honest, I'm not even interested in The Asia Cup

Fair enough...

I'm just addicted to cricket, it's quite sad really...

No, not at all.

I would say I use to love the game but now enjoy it. The same goes for Football.

lol i wonder how many different threads there are on this subject on the board.

To be honest i am sick of seeing the same bunch of full member teams play pointless matches against one another. the Eng-Pakistan series seemed to drag for an eternity, and the asia cup is the biggest load of bull ive ever heard of.

Personally i think it is a farce that some countries can play one form of the game cos they are one of the better/traditional nations while other developing nations cant. It is an obselete ruling/viewpoint from the stoneage clan (ICC) who run the game, and in no other sport does such a thing exist. Assoc teams alrdy play 4day games and I do not think the game would be brought into disrepute if an extra day was added. Test cricket should be a right enjoyed by everyone rather than an entitled few

fists, you seem to know quite a bit about Ireland cricket, how many clubs do they currently have and are the communities well represented.

In other words how possible is it for them to have a fourth province and how and from where could it be funded?

atletico86 wrote:To be honest i am sick of seeing the same bunch of full member teams play pointless matches against one another. the Eng-Pakistan series seemed to drag for an eternity, and the asia cup is the biggest load of bull ive ever heard of.

Personally i think it is a farce that some countries can play one form of the game cos they are one of the better/traditional nations while other developing nations cant. It is an obselete ruling/viewpoint from the stoneage clan (ICC) who run the game, and in no other sport does such a thing exist. Assoc teams alrdy play 4day games and I do not think the game would be brought into disrepute if an extra day was added. Test cricket should be a right enjoyed by everyone rather than an entitled few

Now mate you know that simply won't do. Far too rational.

A while back on a previous post I expanded an length about the structure of cricket in Ireland (in response to I think it was really-real who claimed it was nothing like that of a first class county). I'll see if I can track it down.

biltongbek wrote:fists, you seem to know quite a bit about Ireland cricket, how many clubs do they currently have and are the communities well represented.

In other words how possible is it for them to have a fourth province and how and from where could it be funded?

This is what I wrote a few months back (after doing some research, so I have no reason to doubt what I wrote)...

For information, the structure in Ireland is actually very similar to that of a county, although numbers are smaller.

In Ireland, cricket is localised to 5 provinces, with a total of 147 clubs and 335 teams. In 3 of the 5 provinces cricket is well developped (117 clubs and 292 teams between the 3 of them, but more importantly junior leagues from U11 to U19, and also importantly 59 schools affiliated), whilst it is still in its early stages elsewhere. Participation numbers in Ireland are estimated at around 25,000.

Compare the situation with Kent, where cricket is localised to 16 districts, split up inside 4 regions. It is difficult to get hold of precise numbers, but it is probably around 100 per region, so of course 400 clubs which is significantly more. However the number of clubs per district (25 on average) is actually fairly close to the number of clubs per province in Ireland, with similar participation numbers. At the junior level, district competitions are run for U10 to U14, and club competitions for U15 to U19.

Both Ireland and Kent have of course all age group sides, and an accademy. Ireland also have fully contracted players (although again fewer than Kent due to ressources).

==========

They do have 5 provinces, but at the moment only 3 are really active.

Cheers Thanks mike, is there then not a possibility for Ireland to enter their three active provinces in a county league?

Do you mean form a professional league with just the 3 provinces? They could, but it would be more or less useless as ICC regs stipulate at least 4-team strong professional league is required for full membership.

Or do you mean enter their provinces in a parallel league run in England? I suspect expenses would be a problem...

Yes, from a perspective of getting the three provinces going in four day matches.

If they are considering to get into test cricket in 8 years time, it would help them a lot to start getting the three organised provinces involved in county cricket.

No use to wait until they have a fourth province going.

Imagine the experience a larger number of players will gain from this.

Cost wise I understand could be an issue, but there is always a way.

Irelands best bet would be to try and get EVERY side touring England to play at least one warm up match in Ireland, if they'd all sign up for it anyway.
If it were to happen, we'd see an increase in the games exposure in Ireland, some players would seriously consider their options re England selection if they could guarantee a couple of 4-5 day representative matches and a few ODIs, 20/20s per year and the overall standard of play and player would probably improve on an almost yearly basis.