Should Kenya be given test status

[Fiery]

No offense, but why is this an excellent idea? I can't fathom why.

Zimbabwe is miles away from Kenya, and seperated by several countries. But, more importantly, no country in the world wants to associate itself with Zimbabwe, for obvious reasons.

Except for Chavez, but he's a dolt and probably a bit nuts.

yeah, you are dead right there actually BlackCap_Fan....neither country deserve any sort of leeway given their recent history

 

[chaminda_00]

That is being very, very generous and something Bangladesh have done little to deserve.

In that 12 years compared to 8, they played roughly the same number of ODIs, roughly 150 (Ill ignore Tests as Bangladesh are even further behind there).

Sri Lanka had 36 wins against Test nations (excl. Zim)

Bangladesh have 4

There is no doubt Bangladesh have progressed (it would be impossible not to), but I would not say they are even close to being a decent team or that the fast tracking is paying off.

Haven't three out of the four wins come in the last 18 months though. I would be surprised if in the similar period 1992 to 94, Sri Lanka record wasn't every similar. Sri Lanka won the odd game here and there as we always had a few world class players here and there. But it wasn't until around 94 where we had a generation of world class players coming through.

 

[Richard]

Personally I'd say Sri Lanka had more World-class players in 1984 than Bangladesh have now.

Shahriar Nafees Ahmed and Mohammad Rafique, that's about it.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Personally I'd say Sri Lanka had more World-class players in 1984 than Bangladesh have now.

Shahriar Nafees Ahmed and Mohammad Rafique, that's about it.

What about Mashrafe Mortaza?.Seems like a very handy bowler indeed.Will do well against top opposition IMO.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Personally I'd say Sri Lanka had more World-class players in 1984 than Bangladesh have now.

Shahriar Nafees Ahmed and Mohammad Rafique, that's about it.

Sri Lanka had Roy Dias and young Ranatunga and Aravinda, plus some Bangladesh-level seamers...

 

[Richard]

Hmm, Ravi Ratnayeke and the like tend to strike me as being better than the Shahadat Hossains and the like of this World, if only by a bit...

EDIT: and of the batsmen you've missed Sidath Wettimunny, Ranjan Madugalle and Duleep Mendis.

 

[Richard]

What about Mashrafe Mortaza?.Seems like a very handy bowler indeed.Will do well against top opposition IMO.

No more than handy. Probably have a Craig White like career at best.

 

[chaminda_00]

Mashrafe Mortaza will be better then Chaminda Vaas IMO, his a lot more then handy.

 

[Richard]

I'll look forward to seeing that if it happens.

 

[rodzilla1010]

But Kenya should be given more opputunities than they are getting....there are very few incentives for players for these players to take up crickket as a full time job...instead they squeeze it in thier schedule...many good players might just be missing out because of it.

I think Kenya should be given atleast 5-10 ODIs a year agianst the test nations

 

[Richard]

ODIs are not the need, 4-day cricket is the need - and being paid a decent wage.

With the current state of the Cricket Board, such a thing is not possible and anything that attempts to fix the problem without fixing the source of the problem will go nowhere.

 

[i_cricket]

Yes and Kenya should have got this test status in 2003 itself after a semi-final performance. They do have some good youngsters coming up now which wasnt the case till 2005.

Besides Kenya, the european associates(SCO,IRE,HOL) should also be developed and given test status in future if they do well in ODIs. Also associates should be encouraged to play more 4-day matches

 

[pop707]

pop707

The short answer, no. The longer answer, no.

Are they not a damn side better than Zim now if they dont deserve it take it away from Zim

 

[Natman20]

I believe they deserve test status but not play as often as the other teams until they establish themselves. I think they have a lot of potential to match other test teams although I think a large number of there more older better players are probably not going to be playing for much longer.

 

[Natman20]

Yes and Kenya should have got this test status in 2003 itself after a semi-final performance. They do have some good youngsters coming up now which wasnt the case till 2005.

Besides Kenya, the european associates(SCO,IRE,HOL) should also be developed and given test status in future if they do well in ODIs. Also associates should be encouraged to play more 4-day matches

They only got through because NZ forfeited a match against them although I do believe they should get test status.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

There is absolutely nothing in Kenyan cricket right now to suggest that they even approach deserving Test status. I don't see why people seem to want to rush all these teams to the highest level of cricket. Listen to Tikolo and give Kenya more ODI games against quality teams. Give them more first-class cricket - lots more! Then maybe 5-10 years down the line, consider them for Tests.

What did we learn from the Bangladesh promotion? I really don't see how Kenya is any more prepared.

 

[Tomm NCCC]

Good point raised there...

I would say that they should be given test status, but not now. The players need more experience. They need to play the likes of New Zealand, and Pakistan, and at a push maybe see how they go on against the Aussies.

 

[Mister Wright]

There is absolutely nothing in Kenyan cricket right now to suggest that they even approach deserving Test status. I don't see why people seem to want to rush all these teams to the highest level of cricket. Listen to Tikolo and give Kenya more ODI games against quality teams. Give them more first-class cricket - lots more! Then maybe 5-10 years down the line, consider them for Tests.

What did we learn from the Bangladesh promotion? I really don't see how Kenya is any more prepared.

Yeah, but most teams have struggled when given test status. New Zealand, Sri Lanka and India all had rough starts when starting out in tests.

 

[Richard]

Nowhere near as rough as Bangladesh. Even in the New Zealand case.

India, West Indies, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe all deserved Test status when they were given it IMO. They might have been the weakest of the sides, but they weren't overwhelmed pretty much every time they played the way Bangladesh have been.

It took New Zealand a good 30 or 40-odd games, though. Bangladesh have already played that many in 6 years and got near enough nowhere (by the time of their next game it'll be over a year since their last one).

Bangladesh's granting of Test status was a mistake, I just don't see how anyone could fail to recognise such a thing.

 

[i_cricket]

They only got through because NZ forfeited a match against them although I do believe they should get test status.

IT isnt about just NZ forfeiting their match against KEN, but the fact that KEN beat SL in the 2003 WC and also they usually run sides much closer than what Bangladesh used to do at that time. Although with some players leaving and due to the infighting Kenyan cricket declined after 2003 forcing loss of ODI status, but after that they regrouped and have done well since 2006 and look to be back on track. Kenya are already aiming for a super-8 spot in the WC. If they get through it will be great for they will face 6 good sides and get some more matches against big teams in the super-8 stage.