Should Ireland and Kenya be given Test Status?

[playkid12]

I personally think they should. I really don't understand why it hasn't been given to them. They've shown a lot of improvement from the other minnow nations. I think the ICC is just too scared because of the money factor. Obviously, not too many people will watch cricket in either Kenya or Ireland, since its still in development. But how will cricket expand if the ICC just wait and wait for the teams to be really good before they offer them test status, which is simply impossible? When teams start out, they're expected to lose. I'd love to see more countries playing ODI's and Tests. Then cricket 'seasons' could start, which could be a lot more structured (like how baseball and american football are in the USA). Cricket is horribly managed. They have random schedules - often playing a series with a certain team and then following it up with a triangular series with the same two teams and another team. It's so random. Why not have a structured year, where each team has to play a certain amount of matches with other teams? The scheduling now seems as if its just run by the sponsors. And why not bring another 5-6 teams into the mix and begin the expanding process? The other teams will only get better if they get experience from world-class competition.

 

[andrew_nixon]

Should Ireland and Kenya be given Test status right now?

Clearly, the answer is no. Whilst they are certainly at the playing standards required for Test status, they are far from meeting the other criteria, as I have mentioned time and time again on this forum.

 

[Gunner786]

Should Ireland and Kenya be given Test status right now?

Clearly, the answer is no. Whilst they are certainly at the playing standards required for Test status, they are far from meeting the other criteria, as I have mentioned time and time again on this forum.

if they do then its goodbye all the current batting and bowling records then

 

[MUFC1987]

I think those two and Zimbabwe should be helped out a lot more. I mean at the moment, they're the ones expected to win the games they play, whereas if they played more games against A teams, or Second XI's then they'd make more progress in my view. I mean whilst you'd expect them to get hammered by any of the top sides, they may fair better against second string sides, that would also give the ICC an indication of when these teams would be ready for Test Cricket.

 

[andrew_nixon]

if they do then its goodbye all the current batting and bowling records then

Good point, because the current Test batting and bowling records are held against teams that have only had Test status for a very short time, like England and Australia.

 

[sohum]

I don't think Ireland and Kenya are ready yet. I think a few First Class games against test playing countries should be organized to gage the potential. Given that we are seeing Bangladesh still struggling, and given that Bangladesh, Ireland and Kenya are approximately on the same level (with Bangladesh a neck ahead, I would say), I would not rush into test status, or at least full test status, for these teams.

I would be more agreeable of a division of two groups, perhaps of 8 teams and 6 teams, where the stronger teams have matches of full test status and the weaker teams have matches of lower test status. However, given that cricket is not a sport planned around an organized calendar (given that seasonal changes have so much to do with it), I think this system would have to be thought out a lot.

Good point, because the current Test batting and bowling records are held against teams that have only had Test status for a very short time, like England and Australia.

I would put significant money on Australia re-writing a record or two in a 3-test series against Kenya, given that hypothetical situation.

 

[ZexyZahid]

They shouldn't, especially since Bangladesh (and also Zimbabwe when they will have Test status back) have problems of playing in this type of cricket.

Also the competiveness among countries in each series will decrease then.

 

[Almost_Austwick]

The simple fact of the matter is that until a nation has sorted out a proper and sustainable 4 day first class competition they shouldn't even dream of playing test cricket.

I'm a big fan of having a 2nd division of test cricket (the intercontinental cup is step in the right direction) which could be played over 4 days and would include the likes of Ireland, Scotland, Netherlands, Zimbabwe, Kenya and others who are able to meet the set criteria.

I don't see the need for promotion or relegation but there should certainly be a system where if a team dominates the competition for a while and is deemed capable they earn the opportunity to move into the big time. Likewise, if a team is considered too weak they can also be demoted and replaced.

 

[manee]

Good point, because the current Test batting and bowling records are held against teams that have only had Test status for a very short time, like England and Australia.

I don't know what you just meant, but Gambino was saying that matches against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe are rarely counted in debate or comparisons between players such as the one between MoYo and Dravid and less matches would be 'counted' if those two gained status.

My belief is that no they should not be given status not because of other criteria, but simply they are not good enough. Zimbabwe and Bangladesh should both be stripped. Zimbabwe now and Bangladesh should be reviewed in five to ten years when the 20 year olds in their team grow up and then we can see if they become world beaters or the same underperformers they are now.

 

[Skater]

I'd keep Bangladesh as a test side. The country is politically stable, they are actually improving as well. Who could forget vs Australia in 2005? India in 2004? Zimbabwe in 2004? India in 2007? Bangladesh in 2007?

 

[manee]

Bangladesh in 2007?

 

[BigCrickNan]

I bet he meant South Africa

 

[Skater]

I bet he meant South Africa

Dead right, Drew. Dead right. There I was on my high horse, making a good point, then I made a mistake and the dumbass buckles.

 

[Sureshot]

I don't know what you just meant, but Gambino was saying that matches against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe are rarely counted in debate or comparisons between players such as the one between MoYo and Dravid and less matches would be 'counted' if those two gained status.

My belief is that no they should not be given status not because of other criteria, but simply they are not good enough. Zimbabwe and Bangladesh should both be stripped. Zimbabwe now and Bangladesh should be reviewed in five to ten years when the 20 year olds in their team grow up and then we can see if they become world beaters or the same underperformers they are now.

Bangladesh imo are making improvements and have some quality youngsters in their ranks, they need to learn how to win and how to beat big teams in Test matches. It takes time for teams to get to grips on the international stage. My thoughts on Zimbabwe are well known.

Ireland and Kenya? They both have some good players and Ireland have a great team ethic, they are better than Zimbabwe but the infrastructure of the Cricket within the country isn't good enough. Both have financial difficulties and Ireland have the problem of Football, Rugby, Gaelic Football, etc being so much bigger in a relatively small population.

In the future? I can see it maybe for Ireland.

 

[aussie1st]

As has been stated until these countries get their domestic system up to standard they won't stand much chance in the big league. Can't see Kenya being ready for a while on that front, Ireland are a better chance but to get cricket big in their country will be a tough ask.