Bangladesh as a Test Playing Nation ?

[icyman]

A great Monday and what better than a controversial post to begin it with. Ever since they were granted the Full Membership/right to play test cricket. I have been very very skeptical of the ICC+BCB. Agree that countries take time to establish themselves and this can take a few years.

Given how the game has progressed in the last 2 decades, you'd expect newer teams to benefit from technology, coaching manuals+ what not in order to set up a decent world-class unit. We have seen success stories with the likes of Afghanistan and Ireland who have achieved much more in a shorter span of time. Yes, the formats have been different. However, compare with Bangladesh- they havent really set the stage on fire have they? A few ODI bilateral wins on crumbling pitches, a few upsets at the CWC and thats all. In terms of trophies, they have none to show for, not even a single Asia Cup.

Anyway, my grouse is with their Test status. Their Test performances are shoddy. People here will bring up NZ and India who took 25+ years to register their first wins. However, the times then and now are vastly different. BD just isn't competitive at this level. When Zimbabwe fell out, their board took a rational decision and stopped playing Test cricket. I personally feel BD needs to step away from this format until they beef up their domestic structure.

What are your thoughts on this?

 

[ahmedleo414]

I understand what you're saying, but at the same time I feel like we should be adding more teams to the test status not taking away any.

Eventually the rest rankings will come to mean something with the lower ranked test nations playing amongst themselves to hopefully challenge one of the bigger Nations.

Maybe a tiered system that follows the cycle of the test championship, lowest two ranking teams get delegated and the top two from the second tier get upgraded

 

[Bevab]

You are the one who wanted the Bangladeshi team to be banned from cricket because Shakib was being a prick in a domestic match right?

 

[icyman]

You are the one who wanted the Bangladeshi team to be banned from cricket because Shakib was being a prick in a domestic match right?

Yes, I did mention that earlier. And I do stand firm on it. I believe I had referenced FIFA and their player code at that time. FIFA doesnt hesitate banning teams/ players/ fans if found guilty of wrong-doings

I understand what you're saying, but at the same time I feel like we should be adding more teams to the test status not taking away any.

Eventually the rest rankings will come to mean something with the lower ranked test nations playing amongst themselves to hopefully challenge one of the bigger Nations.

Maybe a tiered system that follows the cycle of the test championship, lowest two ranking teams get delegated and the top two from the second tier get upgraded

In this case, it was Bangladesh who opposed the Tiered system. Ideally, the tiered system benefits all countries as you dont plunge to unimaginable depths. I agree, more nations should come in. However, this can be done only in a tiered format.

 

[NILAYSHAH60]

I have many times called for a tier system in Test Cricket. But honestly it is not a viable option in a sport like Cricket when it comes to bilateral series. It is not ICC who decides on these matches but there's an agreement between the two boards that's being made. If we do have a tiered system, then the difference between these sides in financial terms increases and eventually these sides will fail to develop/improve themselves.

 

[icyman]

Tiered system will work. As it is, the Big 3 do not play the others (for good reason as well).

Unless BD gets their game up, they shouldnt be allowed to compete and waste resources with the likes of Australia, Eng, Nz and India.

The tiered system - which I have been proposing for quite some time, needs to ensure that at the end of each cycle, the bottom 2 and best 2 get promoted relegated. Without the carrot of promotions, there's absolutely nothing to play for.

 

[Aislabie]

If two national teams wish to play multi-day cricket against each other then it should be a Test match, as simple as that. The standard of the cricket being played doesn't come into it at all and this is a facetious argument.

However, the Bangladesh Cricket Board might actually be served better by stepping away from Test cricket, but not for any of the reasons you've mentioned here. The winner of the first era of Twenty20 cricket was India; the winner of the second era of Twenty20 cricket will be whichever country is able to pile resources behind T20 cricket and not give a damn about the other formats - create something along the lines of the English football league or Major League Baseball and make it the nation's pastime. Bangladesh has the healthy club struture, the rabid fanbase and the stadia to make a success out of such a transition in a way that only a few other countries do.

 

[icyman]

The recent Pakistan series proves my point. They aren't competitive enough.

 

[Aislabie]

The recent Pakistan series proves my point. They aren't competitive enough.

Your "point " is utter nonsense. You don't ban nations from playing a sport just because they lose.

Also becaise of the nonsense of "status" being made artificially scarce, you get the silliness of a top 10 team in the world being shown sod-all respect

 

[Aislabie]

Damn right I'm stickying this thread

I'll probably take it down in a week or so if no-one else gets to that before me

 

[wasteyouryouth]

Took less than a month to be the worst take ever @icyman

 

[Bigby Wolf]

Well well well....

 

[icyman]

I am actually trying to emulate Sanjay Manjrekar here. Speaking out against Bangladesh did improve their performance, didnt it ?

 

[ddrap14]

I am actually trying to emulate Sanjay Manjrekar here. Speaking out against Bangladesh did improve their performance, didnt it ?

Can you speak out about the Brisbane Heat please?

 

[wasteyouryouth]

Can you speak out about the Brisbane Heat please?

and England