Do Bangladesh deserve Test Status

[Xuhaib]

I think ICC should seriously start thinking about funding the domestic infrastructure of the weaker test playing nations like Pakistan, SL, BD Wi and Zim with passage of time the gap between the stronger and weaker nations will grow wider which will not be good for the general health of the game. Instead of focusing on developing cricket in Alaska or Uganda its better that ICC keeps its focus on the current playing nations.

 

[andruid]

I think the strength and depth of Domestic structures should be the role criteria for the ICC's cricket development strategy. Everything else feeds off that.

 

[Jacknife]

I think ICC should seriously start thinking about funding the domestic infrastructure of the weaker test playing nations like Pakistan, SL, BD Wi and Zim with passage of time the gap between the stronger and weaker nations will grow wider which will not be good for the general health of the game. Instead of focusing on developing cricket in Alaska or Uganda its better that ICC keeps its focus on the current playing nations.

I don't think the answer is kicking anyone out of tests cricket, far too much money has been invested now to go back but I do think what you said above is important, improvements need to made from grass roots level right to the very top and the only way is for the ICC to fund it.

 

[smash84]

I think ICC should seriously start thinking about funding the domestic infrastructure of the weaker test playing nations like Pakistan, SL, BD Wi and Zim with passage of time the gap between the stronger and weaker nations will grow wider which will not be good for the general health of the game. Instead of focusing on developing cricket in Alaska or Uganda its better that ICC keeps its focus on the current playing nations.

With a little proper investment Pak can easily be a top 3 test nation if not top.

 

[andruid]

Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Ireland and Zimbabwe players already live next door to countries with good FC leagues, its countries like Kenya who are somehow expected to raise regional cricket standards on an associate budget that should be complaining the most about this kind of thing

Bangladesh & Zimbabwe having Test Status and Ireland not having is highly fair for following reason
1. Bangladesh and Zimbabwe get share to 7.5% of ICC Earning each year which is roughly 7.5 M$ a year while teams like Afghans and Ireland just get meager 0.6 M$ a year. Due to this fact Bangladesh and Zimbabwe get money to tour other nations while Afghans and Irish have to work hard to make end meets and keep whole team professional
2. Bangladesh and Zimbabwe due to their test status in a non justifiable way make a direct entry into tournament like WC, World Twenty20 or Champion Trophy while Afghans and Irish have to fight with 12 or 16 teams to make it where just 1 upset can put them out of the tournament
3. BD and Zim get to be part of FTP where they get exposure against better teams while Afghans and Ireland have to beg for 1 or 2 ODI's
4. As being part of FTP they get to host nations like Ind, Eng, Pak or Aus which brings in additional income for the hosts which Irish or Afghan do not get
Zimbabwe and Bangladesh are not cut above Ireland or Afghans. They are better due to unfair advantage of more exposure and funding they have. Make the system more fair then it will be no problems

 

[Furball]

I like that idea. It would make test cricket more competitive.

No it wouldn't. The undisputed king of the associates is RtD, and he's no more than an average County player.

 

[Furball]

I think ICC should seriously start thinking about funding the domestic infrastructure of the weaker test playing nations like Pakistan, SL, BD Wi and Zim with passage of time the gap between the stronger and weaker nations will grow wider which will not be good for the general health of the game. Instead of focusing on developing cricket in Alaska or Uganda its better that ICC keeps its focus on the current playing nations.

Couldn't disagree more. Why should incompetent boards be given more millions of dollars to squander when that money would do a lot of good in the associate game?

 

[Xuhaib]

Couldn't disagree more. Why should incompetent boards be given more millions of dollars to squander when that money would do a lot of good in the associate game?

If ICC is providing funds then it should also take responsibility to see the money is being utilzed within the proper channels. I strongly believe if the health of the game is good and competitive among the top 8-10 countries the profile of the sport automatically improves and the sport will attract interest from other nations aswell.

 

[Furball]

If ICC is providing funds then it should also take responsibility to see the money is being utilzed within the proper channels. I strongly believe if the health of the game is good and competitive among the top 8-10 countries the profile of the sport automatically improves and the sport will attract interest from other nations aswell.

Nah, disagree. Once the money is allocated it is nothing to do with the ICC how it is spent. If boards are wasting money they shouldn't be getting more. That's not fair to the associates, nor is it fair to those boards who run themselves competently.

Where the ICC should be getting involved is in ensuring that their member boards are free from political interference.

 

[Xuhaib]

With a little proper investment Pak can easily be a top 3 test nation if not top.

weak in terms of economics. We can't expect to keep on producing quality cricketers if an average domestic continues to earn just 10k per month, a lot of talent is lost due to lower pay scales for the domestic cricketers.

 

[NasserFan207]

If ICC is providing funds then it should also take responsibility to see the money is being utilzed within the proper channels. I strongly believe if the health of the game is good and competitive among the top 8-10 countries the profile of the sport automatically improves and the sport will attract interest from other nations aswell.

How do you propose they do that though?

 

[Xuhaib]

Nah, disagree. Once the money is allocated it is nothing to do with the ICC how it is spent. If boards are wasting money they shouldn't be getting more. That's not fair to the associates, nor is it fair to those boards who run themselves competently.

Where the ICC should be getting involved is in ensuring that their member boards are free from political interference.

yeah its not ideal but the need of the immediate hour is that some cricket boards are running like sick industrial units so its better then in the immediate future ICC should look to focus on improving the cricketing infrastructure of these test playing members once those boards are strong enough to stand on their own then the attention can be shifted elsewhere.

 

[Xuhaib]

edit.

 

[Xuhaib]

How do you propose they do that though?

lets take an example of Pakistan. A lot of domestic teams feature players who get selected on nepotism have ICC appointed coaches for these domestic sides if the coach is being forced to select an undeserving player he can lodge a complain to ICC and ICC can request PCB to take action against that cricket association. Other things that can done such as establishing world class cricket academies getting sponsors for the domestic game, control the financial aspects of the board maybe the CFO of the cricket board be ICC appointed.

these are some of the things that ICC can look in to.

 

[Jacknife]

Nah, disagree. Once the money is allocated it is nothing to do with the ICC how it is spent. If boards are wasting money they shouldn't be getting more. That's not fair to the associates, nor is it fair to those boards who run themselves competently.

Where the ICC should be getting involved is in ensuring that their member boards are free from political interference.

That really is harder said than done in countries such as these.

 

[Woodster]

I believe Bangladesh should be playing more Test nations 'A' teams, that they, especially against the likes of England, India. SA, and Australia, they'll be getting a competitive game that they will take a fair bit of confidence out of a victory against them and they will no doubt have to work hard for it. They need to learn the art of winning, currently they're plundering from one hammering to another. Once things begin to go against them it is unsurprising that they start thinking 'here we go again', they don't have any positive experiences of winning matches.

Their standard of first-class cricket is an obvious area of concern. Players that are managing good results in domestic cricket are still some way from being able to transfer that into Test cricket as the gap between the two formats is inevitably huge.

I don't think the argument of 'look how long it took NZ and SL to become competitive' necessarily works. Yes it does take a side some time to adjust to Test cricket, but those two nations are not a blueprint for how it should be done, the ICC need to be looking at ways to avoid countries having spend year after year getting slapped about before they begin to get competitive.

Tamim Iqbal, Shakib al Hasan, and maybe Mushfiqur Rahim are reasons for Bangladesh fans to be hopeful for the future. It is good to see the likes of Shakib playing County cricket, to help develop his game, and I would hope the other two are looking at options to enhance their first-class playing experience at a higher level than their own domestic tournament.

I would Bangladesh mixing with the big nations on an ODI level, but at Tests, imo, they should be looking at playing top nations 'A' teams.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I've rehashed my thoughts on the subject numerous times, so once more won't hurt.

It's not Bangladesh have test status that's the problem, it's them being included in the FTP. By all means let them play tests, but don't demand that other countries have to play them home and away every four/five years.

Their game versus the Zimbas was actually pretty entertaining as far as it went, but them being roundly whipped in SA, Oz, UAE or England far less so. It's not good product and tests need to be delivering gold right now.

 

[Jacknife]

Yes, I like the idea of more teams sending out A sides to play Bangladesh instead of the first teams . At the end of the day it's about them getting more competition at a similar level to themselves, it's the only way they're going to improve.

 

[Jono]

Even if they don't deserve test status, removing test status will do no good at all.

 

[Athlai]

Bangladesh A already plays more A teams than seemingly anyone else.

Since the start of 2006 the unofficial Tests played for the A teams (including touring Test teams ie NZers):
Sri Lanka A 22
Bangladesh A 20
West Indies A 16
South Africa A 16
England A 6 + England Lions 9 = 15
India A 14 (but including 2 vs Kenya A and 2 vs a Zimbabwe Select XI that sounds a bit dubious)
Australia A 14
Pakistan A 12
Zimbabwe A 9 (includes Kenya select XI but doesn't include 2 vs. SA academy)
NZ A 7

Give them MORE A TEAM MATCHES!!!