when do you think a so called minnow team will win a world Cup

[Magrat Garlick]

There's four Irishmen who've played tests for England I know of: Leland Hone, Sir Tim O'Brien, Joseph McMaster & Frederick Fane. .

All played before partition, regardless.

 

[Poker Boy]

Bangladesh could ...maybe in 2011? Sounds ridiculous but who in 1992 HONESTLY thought SL would win in 1996...and 2011 is a sub-continental WC which will help them (as '96 was). But they need to keep Whatore as coach and this young team together. I think they are the only non big eight country that could win it unless there is regime change in Zimbabwe..

 

[Josh]

Only one of the top teams will win. I won't limit to a number, because I believe a top 8 could change to a top 10 in time.

 

[Richard]

The question I ask is where is England on that list?


More interestingly, who will win a World Cup first, England or one of those countries?

Spot the Australian.

 

[speirz]

Spot the Australian.

Who me?

 

[Richard]

No, John Howard.

 

[LA ICE-E]

people from ireland(not northern ireland) cant play for england(correct me if im wrong) so there would still be a ireland team and would be the same becaue the people from northern ireland can be citizens of either england or ireland...on the other had scotland applied to be a seperate team to the icc(icc didn't do that, the icc doesn't make the teams, the teams apply for memberships)....

 

[Richard]

Not so very long ago, England, Scotland, Wales, NI and ROI were all one team in international cricket terms - political lines meant nothing.

Now, with I$C$C looking to put out the "Global" myth, it helps to count countries as separate when they never really have been. Look-out for some West Indian territories next...

 

[LA ICE-E]

what the **** dont you get? they seperated THEMSELVES, the icc had nothing to do with it. And if the west indian countries wants to seperate too, than thats fine too.

 

[Richard]

You're the one that doesn't "get" it, as I've said more than a few times.

They were actively encouraged to seek separate status. Thereby essentially blanking-out 100 years and more of history. And with it further dividing the nations of the British Isles. But living over there in the US of A, I wouldn't really expect you to understand these sorts of things, and your utterly simplistic view of the matter is little but to-be-expected.

 

[LA ICE-E]

what you got problems with americans or something? it doesn't blank out any history, because history is history not the present and present doesn't have to follow the past. if they are encouraged to seek seperate membership then why is the WI still together? because it was in the '90s or something when both Ireland and Scotland got their memberships and until 97 or something around there, there weren't even a development program. So there's some problems with your accusations. 1st if there wasn't a developing program and why would they want to encourage teams to be come seperate, to support their myth of globalization? they weren't even putting effort in that yet!( WI is an exception but wouldn't be a problem if they seperated.) Also cricket is kind of a national sport and it is best that way. thats why its called a national cricket team. thats why you dont see much intrest when its combined teams like in the afro-asia cup and stuff like that. most people take more pride playing for his/her country than playing for someone elses country or a all star kind of game

 

[Richard]

what you got problems with americans or something?

I've got a problem with Americans like you commenting on British issues when they don't have the foggiest idea what they're on about.

it doesn't blank out any history, because history is history not the present and present doesn't have to follow the past.

Self-contradictory. Once you make an active attempt to steer away from the course of a length of history, you're attempting to blank it out.

if they are encouraged to seek seperate membership then why is the WI still together? because it was in the '90s or something when both Ireland and Scotland got their memberships and until 97 or something around there, there weren't even a development program. So there's some problems with your accusations.

Nope. Just because there was no development program doesn't mean the $$$-eyes weren't already on making the sport look more Global.

1st if there wasn't a developing program and why would they want to encourage teams to be come seperate, to support their myth of globalization? they weren't even putting effort in that yet!( WI is an exception but wouldn't be a problem if they seperated.)

The Globalisation talk started looooooooong before the Development Program was put into place, son.

Also cricket is kind of a national sport and it is best that way. thats why its called a national cricket team. thats why you dont see much intrest when its combined teams like in the afro-asia cup and stuff like that. most people take more pride playing for his/her country than playing for someone elses country or a all star kind of game

Except West Indians and Brits - who've always taken pride in playing for their own team.

There's no compulsion whatsoever for a cricket team to be a National one - most people take pride in playing for any team they regard as theirs. That's one of the most nonsensical things you've ever written - and there are a few contenders.

 

[adharcric]

If I had to make a choice, I'd say Bangladesh in 2015. Zimbabwe, Canada and Ireland are three other minnow sides that may compete down the road.

 

[LA ICE-E]

I've got a problem with Americans like you commenting on British issues when they don't have the foggiest idea what they're on about.

Self-contradictory. Once you make an active attempt to steer away from the course of a length of history, you're attempting to blank it out.

Nope. Just because there was no development program doesn't mean the $$$-eyes weren't already on making the sport look more Global.

The Globalisation talk started looooooooong before the Development Program was put into place, son.

Except West Indians and Brits - who've always taken pride in playing for their own team.

There's no compulsion whatsoever for a cricket team to be a National one - most people take pride in playing for any team they regard as theirs. That's one of the most nonsensical things you've ever written - and there are a few contenders.

uh british issues? this isn't a british issue and the british doesn't control the(most of) world any more...get over it...you know why cricket isn't that big in ireland? because they see it as a british sport....and thats the setback...

really, so tell me what sport doesn't look spread their game globally? and your a ****ing ignorant if you're saying that none have progressed in that department...

Yeah i dont think the Irish wants themselves to be called brits....

And most people just take their national teams as theirs....

yeah if i have few contenders..you have hundreds in that catagory