Well I can't fault you on saying that Ireland need Test status - it would be great for them. Trouble is that it would suck for everyone else. More games to fit into an already packed schedule, more money being funnelled away from established countries that are struggling for cash eg. New Zealand, Sri Lanka, West Indies, even Zimbabwe.
I'd like to see more 'A' teams play against Ireland, that's how I'd improve their cricket.
The "ease in" theory can easily be replaced with tiers which I won't go into in detail again, but it is the only way I can see a team like Ireland getting Test status.
Otherwise I can see 'The Author' not being at their first Test as it either won't happen, or he'd have to be dug up.
Are Ireland anywhere near being a competitive ODI side let alone a Test side? I'd say not. Ireland may have upset some applecarts in the past two World Cups, most notably reaching the super 8 in 2007, but still aren't competitive enough.
Their overall record in ODIs may look good, but it includes a lot of Holland, Kenya, Scotland, Canada and other non-Test nations. Split their record and you have a much less impressive picture.
overall (05/06-present) : P74 W34 L35 Tie 1 NR 4 (Won 45.95%)
vs Test sides* : P23 W2 L19 NR 2 (Won 8.70%)
vs ZIM/BAN : P12 W3 L8 Tie 1 (Won 25.00%)
vs Non-Test : P39 W29 L8 NR 2 (Won 74.36%)
*excluding ZIM/BAN
Clearly too good for the level they are mostly playing at, not good enough for ODIs against the big boys - 1 in 7 win ratio against Test sides overall, even against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe they lose about 3 in 4.
Even in those two World Cups their record was to cause an upset and then lose heavily.
World Cup 2007 vs Test sides
vs ZIM - tied
vs PAK - won by 3 wkts
vs WIN - lost by 8 wkts
vs ENG - lost by 48 runs
vs SAF - lost by 7 wkts
vs NZE - lost by 129 runs
vs AUS - lost by 9 wkts
vs BAN - won by 74 runs
vs SRI - lost by 8 wkts
Won and tied against the two weakest Test nations, lost heavily to everyone else bar Pakistan who they bear narrowly. England's win by 48 runs is still a fairly large margin for an ODI .
World Cup 2011 vs Test sides
vs BAN - lost by 27 runs
vs ENG - won by 3 wkts
vs IND - lost by 5 wkts
vs WIN - lost by 44 runs
vs SAF - lost by 131 runs
One win over England, England really should have won, and four mixed size defeats. Worst still is the lack of substance displayed by the Ireland top order in those five matches :
first five wickets
110/5 vs BAN (178 all out)
111/5 vs ENG - added 218 for only two further wickets
147/5 vs IND (207 all out)
187/5 vs WIN (231 all out)
92/5 vs SAF (141 all out)
Bar the West Indies match Ireland were always in trouble when five down. It may not look so bad against England, and they did win, but England really should have gone in for the kill
IRE 111/5 after first 24.2 overs (4.56 rpo)
IRE 218/2 off the last 24.5 overs (8.78 rpo)
England conceded 218 runs after the 5th wicket fell, no other Test side conceded more than 68 runs (Bangladesh) before bowling Ireland out. Good effort blah blah blah from O'Brien et al, but England should have polished the lower order off and tail.
Interesting that Ireland's two most significant scalps should be at consecutive World Cups and by three wicket margins.
