General Cricket Discussion

[icyman]

What if India comes first from group A

I'd assume they swap the Sep 6 and Sep 16 matches

The tournament pre-seeding means that Pakistan will be A1 and India A2 irrespective of the group standings. Should Nepal sneak in at, they will take up A1/A2 based on them team that crashes out.

 

[wasteyouryouth]

Being successful in one format until 2016 has got nothing to do with the overall decline that's been plaguing them.

So it's now five years of decline / lack of success = disbandment, not the previous 12 years. Any other goalposts you want to move? The decline is poor management, a poor interconnection through all these different islands, boards having their own self interests, a small population that make it difficult to sustain a high quality side, lack of funding (which is partly a result of their position on the Earth and lack of people).

Why take the view that decline should mean dissolution and not 'what can be done to help halt the decline?' That's what I and a lot of other people think and, while money isn't the only way to fix it, it would help a lot. Disbandment isn't going to make things better for cricket in the Caribbean.

I don't under the obsession with sticking to 'WI won 2 WT20s in the last decade'. Their last win came in 2016. Post that, have they challenged any team consistently? They haven't even been able to challenge the Associates in ODI and T20. Also, winning an ICC event isnt a mark of success/competitiveness. If that was a parameter,they fall way behind in terms of ODIs by not winning anything and also not being able to win the ICC Qualifiers. They don't even show up in Test cricket, have lost the ability to challenge teams in their backyard as well.

They've beaten England twice in their backyard since 2016. England hasn't won in the West Indies since 2004. But I guess that doesn't count because it's not India. Should we do away with the teams that are less competitive than the West Indies like Bangladesh, Zimbabwe too?

The women's team- honestly,how much revenue do you think they bring to the table? Not a valid case to keep running them as a team. Furthermore if the WI is disbanded, they cannot simply keep running a women's team, as per the ICC regulations. The individual islands doing that would make more sense.

What's this obsession with revenue? Should things that don't make money not exist at all?? That's an incredibly sad outlook in life. Sport, like art, should be able to exist outside of a profit motive. Should all countries just be jettisoned unless they can make money? We'd really only be left with India, England and Australia at that point. Those boards would probably be happy but what a boring cricketing landscape that would be.

Lastly, they aren't a country. I don't see you crying over the individual Caribbean islands playing on their own in the Olympics. Would you stand up for the inclusion of a conglomerate then?

Great Britain is in the Olympics so I guess I should stand up for that? England is technically England & Wales - maybe we should be disbanded.

You accused me, based on what I'm saying, of hating the BCCI. I'm really just coming to a similar conclusion that, for some reason, you hate the West Indies.

You largely avoided the question I asked about what you want to see in world cricket, but you did say the game can grow and spread. So why is your suggestion for the Caribbean is to basically say 'not good enough, don't make revenue' you shouldn't be here.

 

[Bevab]

@wasteyouryouth is taking no prisoners today it seems on both the forums and the discord server.

 

[icyman]

Any other goalposts you want to move?

I haven't shifted any goalposts. The overall performance of their side has been going down steadily and no efforts are in place to arrest this decline.
Winning 2 T20 WC doesn't make them a super power. As a matter of fact, WI shouldn't have gone past the line in Kolkata. It was a mere fluke they did.

Why take the view that decline should mean dissolution and not 'what can be done to help halt the decline?'

Counter question: they have for so long been unable to arrest the decline. What's the harm in dissolving and trying out whether the individual nations can do something? Give them all ODI and T20 full membership. No harm in that.

They've beaten England twice in their backyard since 2016. England hasn't won in the West Indies since 2004. But I guess that doesn't count because it's not India. Should we do away with the teams that are less competitive than the West Indies like Bangladesh, Zimbabwe too?

And how many matches did they play against England?

What's this obsession with revenue?

Trust me, it boils down to that. If the game won't make money, people won't be there to play it.

You largely avoided the question I asked about what you want to see in world cricket, but you did say the game can grow and spread. So why is your suggestion for the Caribbean is to basically say 'not good enough, don't make revenue' you shouldn't be here

I didn't say get rid of them entirely. Disband them into 4-5 whatever nations they comprise of and let them play.

Else tomorrow you will have the Americans paying mega bucks to WI players and asking them to play for a team named 'North America's. It isn't fair, is it?

 

[Bevab]

What is the end goal you’re envisioning for these individual nations in the Carribean though? Let the West Indies disband and then… what? Are they suddenly going to get more competitive or lure new talent that they haven’t been able to so far? Do you really believe St Lucia is holding the mighty nation of Barbados back when the latter’s players are heavily over-represented and favoured for instance? It’s the thing I’m most confused about when it comes to disbanding them… it’s like the calls for Brexit because something had to be done in the face of a problem and not because it is the right solution with a plan.

 

[wasteyouryouth]

I haven't shifted any goalposts. The overall performance of their side has been going down steadily and no efforts are in place to arrest this decline.

What attempts do you suggest they should make?

Counter question: they have for so long been unable to arrest the decline. What's the harm in dissolving and trying out whether the individual nations can do something? Give them all ODI and T20 full membership. No harm in that.

Why give multiple nations ODI status and expect they'll do better than a side that is made up of the best player from all those nations? There's about 44 million people in the Caribbean and about 37 million are in countries that aren't part of the West Indies. The domestic structure is made up of four countries and two 'conglomerates' so I guess, that's four nations. Jamaica is the less than 3 million, that'd be smaller than all other full nations, smaller than Scotland, Netherlands, Nepal, USA, Oman. Barbados is below 300,000, it's a miracle they are able to produce so many good to great cricketers over the years. Do you think that would continue in perpetuity without the West Indies? Because that seems to be your criteria - continued, sustained success and competitiveness. They wouldn't make any money, so shouldn't exist by your standards.

And how many matches did they play against England?

They've won 5, lost 5 and drew 8 since the turn of the century.

Trust me, it boils down to that. If the game won't make money, people won't be there to play it.

Is that what you want? Cause that's what will happen.

Else tomorrow you will have the Americans paying mega bucks to WI players and asking them to play for a team named 'North America's. It isn't fair, is it?

You think an independent Trinidad & Tobago, Jamaica, Guyana and Barbados would be able to hold off other countries trying to take their players better than a collective West Indies?

 

[icyman]

What attempts do you suggest they should make?

For starters, have proper contracts for players. Create a talent pool/ talent academy and limit participation in overseas leagues. You simply cannot have your best players becoming mercenaries overnight. WI players of old did turn up for Kerry Packer- but that was a one off instance. Here' you have the likes of Russell, Pollard, Narine, Bravo etc holding the board to ransom.

If that fails, they are as it is a lost cause!

Why give multiple nations ODI status and expect they'll do better than a side that is made up of the best player from all those nations? There's about 44 million people in the Caribbean and about 37 million are in countries that aren't part of the West Indies. The domestic structure is made up of four countries and two 'conglomerates' so I guess, that's four nations. Jamaica is the less than 3 million, that'd be smaller than all other full nations, smaller than Scotland, Netherlands, Nepal, USA, Oman. Barbados is below 300,000, it's a miracle they are able to produce so many good to great cricketers over the years. Do you think that would continue in perpetuity without the West Indies? Because that seems to be your criteria - continued, sustained success and competitiveness. They wouldn't make any money, so shouldn't exist by your standards.

Why the special status to them? Yes, I am aware of the history why they exist, the Caricom and so on. However, letting them play as a unified front, when other sports and international bodies do not allow them to, just isnt fair. It is like promoting an unhealthy ecosystem where boards would team up and create cross country based teams. That would be very similar to how T20 teams are constructed.

The ICC did get rid of East Africa. just cause they weren't competitive enough. Agreed, their constituents are no where to be seen. However, if you've done it in the past, you can do so again with the West Indies too!

They've won 5, lost 5 and drew 8 since the turn of the century.

I believe you are the one bringing in different goalposts now- Since the turn of the century? There's obviously a reason why Australia, England and India dont want to tour and it has to do with the revenues and finances. I honestly wouldn't blame these countries for refusing to play as well.

You think an independent Trinidad & Tobago, Jamaica, Guyana and Barbados would be able to hold off other countries trying to take their players better than a collective West Indies?

International cricket should be played among countries, not continents of groups of nations. Collective WI has failed in protecting its cricketing ecosystem. I am not saying that the likes of T&T, Jamaica can do better- but where it is already lost, why even bother.

 

[icyman]

What is the end goal you’re envisioning for these individual nations in the Carribean though? Let the West Indies disband and then… what? Are they suddenly going to get more competitive or lure new talent that they haven’t been able to so far? Do you really believe St Lucia is holding the mighty nation of Barbados back when the latter’s players are heavily over-represented and favoured for instance? It’s the thing I’m most confused about when it comes to disbanding them… it’s like the calls for Brexit because something had to be done in the face of a problem and not because it is the right solution with a plan.

Carribean lacks the resources. It is quite apparent their players prefer the various T20 leagues going around the world for financial reasons. This has weakened the WI and I don;t think the current players have a feeling of pride whilst turning out for this 'group of nations'. My assumption is that the players who play for the individual islands might give it their best shot (assuming a level of patriotism exists)

Glad you mentioned Barbados- to be honest, a bulk of the WI side belongs to Barbados and T&T. They, on their own can be quite competitive as was evinced in earlier editions of the Champions League.

Future (Assuming they are disbanded)

• Keep them all as Full members. Would make for interesting Qualifier in the next edition of the World Cup/ T20
• Keep them as Full members without the need to play test matches- Their current players seem interested inlimited overs and that is where they will be most competitive.

 

[wasteyouryouth]

Carribean lacks the resources. It is quite apparent their players prefer the various T20 leagues going around the world for financial reasons. This has weakened the WI and I don;t think the current players have a feeling of pride whilst turning out for this 'group of nations'. My assumption is that the players who play for the individual islands might give it their best shot (assuming a level of patriotism exists)

Glad you mentioned Barbados- to be honest, a bulk of the WI side belongs to Barbados and T&T. They, on their own can be quite competitive as was evinced in earlier editions of the Champions League.

Future (Assuming they are disbanded)

• Keep them all as Full members. Would make for interesting Qualifier in the next edition of the World Cup/ T20
• Keep them as Full members without the need to play test matches- Their current players seem interested inlimited overs and that is where they will be most competitive.

I honestly think you're trolling at this point.

You discount the success of the West Indies from seven years ago as an example of their competitiveness, but suggest two teams who were moderately competitive in a tournament that hasn't been played for almost a decade means they can be competitive. Did it occur to you that those players and teams might be successful because they fall under the West Indies umbrella?

The suggestion of making them full members is ridiculous. West Indies Cricket is made up of sixteen boards in total (12 make up two conglomerate boards - which you evidently would demand are disbanded when Leeward Islands and Windward Islands aren't competitive). There's no chance the ICC would grant equal voting power to sixteen new countries let alone share money with them.

 

[Bevab]

Carribean lacks the resources. It is quite apparent their players prefer the various T20 leagues going around the world for financial reasons. This has weakened the WI and I don;t think the current players have a feeling of pride whilst turning out for this 'group of nations'. My assumption is that the players who play for the individual islands might give it their best shot (assuming a level of patriotism exists)

Glad you mentioned Barbados- to be honest, a bulk of the WI side belongs to Barbados and T&T. They, on their own can be quite competitive as was evinced in earlier editions of the Champions League.

Future (Assuming they are disbanded)

• Keep them all as Full members. Would make for interesting Qualifier in the next edition of the World Cup/ T20
• Keep them as Full members without the need to play test matches- Their current players seem interested inlimited overs and that is where they will be most competitive.

I already said that having a team called Jamaica isn’t suddenly going to bring back Andre Russell to play for them. He put up a story on instagram after Sammy’s appointment that he was ready to turn up for the West Indies at the request of the coach himself. Why do you think he didn’t do so in the end?

I brought up Barbados because their players are hilariously favoured in the selection policies. I’ve also said earlier that they would be one of the two or three nations that can put together a side capable of offering a game. However do you think a Barbados only side without some of the other West Indian players is suddenly going to perform better because they now play under a different name? Roston Chase will not suddenly turn into a competent player because he can drape his country’s flag after a game and sing their anthem (I’m pretty sure he can do either of those things already).

This accusation of the players lacking pride is sadly a baseless one. They may lack motivation but I’d wager that’s down to leadership issues rather than solely being a ‘West Indies as an entity doesn’t exist’ thing. They were decently competitive in South Africa just in March… a bilateral like that should give them even less motivation don’t you think? Yet they played much better cricket there than in the qualifiers.

The rest of your two posts seem wildly out of touch with the current reality and belong to a past long gone. Their current crop of players coming through seem more and more like FC specialists rather than white ball merchants because they haven’t been trained properly for the latter. Some of their players are in demand in certain leagues only because of a reputation of West Indian cricketers being good in T20s and not because they actually are. The other reason is because their development system also churns out multi-purpose cricketers alongside the FC specialists who you can fit into any XI you make which helps in balancing a XI when you have restrictions on overseas players.

But let's talk numbers to prove that perhaps these teams are also realising this harsh truth. The most recent IPL had a total of twelve players in ten teams. Four years ago that number was thirteen and this was with sixteen lesser overseas slots in the league. The current MLC tournament has just seven West Indian players in it (no jokes about some of the American ones being West Indian by origin allowed!) and this is in a league that is in the nearest region... if anyone should be selecting favouring players from these places it should be these American teams! If their players were interested in limited overs cricket only as you mention then why have they failed to turn up in two consecutive white ball tournament qualifiers?

And before you hit me with the reason being 'their stars are missing out'... no. Out of the ones that didn't turn up for the ODI qualifiers Lewis is the only one that would have made a difference. Hetmyer perhaps could but he was also terribly inconsistent in his final appearances for the national side. I saw him play in a few of those games and he looked downright terrible. He also failed to turn up for a flight to the last T20 WC twice (after the board arranged a second flight for him alone on his request) for entirely non-cricketing reasons. On top of that he is utterly unfit and has progressively gotten worse at that aspect too. Narine will get called for chucking the moment he plays any form of international cricket while Russell can barely stay fit for the numerous T20 leagues he wishes to turn up to. If you seriously think they need to recall the likes of semi-retired Gayle, Bravo and Pollard then I have a bridge to sell to you.

For starters, have proper contracts for players. Create a talent pool/ talent academy and limit participation in overseas leagues. You simply cannot have your best players becoming mercenaries overnight. WI players of old did turn up for Kerry Packer- but that was a one off instance. Here' you have the likes of Russell, Pollard, Narine, Bravo etc holding the board to ransom.

If that fails, they are as it is a lost cause!

They do have a central contract system as far as I know. You acknowledge that they don't have the resources, refuse to give them more than what they should receive based on what they generate and also want them to force their players to have their right to work limited? If you start limiting their participation in overseas leagues (which is already low these days anyway) then they'll simply retire and continue doing the same like a decade ago. The only international players I can think of that are in demand in many leagues are Joseph, Hosein, Pooran, Mayers and maybe the likes of Holder, Charles (who don't deserve such a status in the first place), Powell and Odean plus Romario? None of these players have been actively skipping international duty on a consistent basis have they? I don't understand why you keep talking about Russell, Pollard, Narine and Bravo again. You trash the KKR duo in every post possible and yet you think they're the type of cricketers that would lift this West Indian side up again? Bravo's close to forty and since the last CPL the only official T20 games he's played are two games in the BPL. Pollard did play a season of PSL but he's also thirty-six, has never been a good ODI cricketer and doesn't bowl a lot these days. Again, is that the type of guy you want in inspiring players?

They do have an academy team, it participated in the List A tournament last year and is slated to do so again. It also played a couple of FC games against a collection of FC players. Some of their players are the ones with the most potential to do something special for the international team. The real issue lies with their individual domestic sides not picking youngsters and sticking with the same old domestic veterans. From what I know... each of them must have two Under-25 players in their sides and only two teams picked more than the requisite amount. They then refuse to play these blokes ahead of the established but mediocre cricketers and then promptly release them once they cross 25 like Leonardo Di Caprio. If by some miracle they keep performing in the lower levels of cricket then they get a redeemed opportunity when they're as old as the previously mediocre bunch but... they don't have the experience of the previous bunch either. Do you see the flaw in such a system?

Now all of this can be fixed with some political willpower and execution... alongside having the money to do it. They would need better people involved in these important roles responsible for such actions but you can't really blame them here either as they have constantly looked for new individuals to attempt new things at the highest positions (they have a new Director of Cricket starting from next month for example).

 

[Bevab]

I honestly think you're trolling at this point.

You discount the success of the West Indies from seven years ago as an example of their competitiveness, but suggest two teams who were moderately competitive in a tournament that hasn't been played for almost a decade means they can be competitive. Did it occur to you that those players and teams might be successful because they fall under the West Indies umbrella?

The suggestion of making them full members is ridiculous. West Indies Cricket is made up of sixteen boards in total (12 make up two conglomerate boards - which you evidently would demand are disbanded when Leeward Islands and Windward Islands aren't competitive). There's no chance the ICC would grant equal voting power to sixteen new countries let alone share money with them.

I believe he's just gone too far in playing devil's advocate in this case and doesn't want to back down at this point.

I also think he's frustrated specifically at countries that he perceives as underperforming relative to where they should be. The ban-hammer was previously suggested for Bangladesh, a side that hasn't completely kicked on internationally despite having a big and passionate population to draw from and ask for support, an adequate cricket structure with established international standard cricketers and an economy that is growing faster than both India and Pakistan. West Indies gets it's turn because it is a team that was once on top of the world of cricket where as now it is getting dunked on by associates. Notice how Ireland doesn't get any of the ire despite having arguably similar or worse results in recent times because there is no weight of expectations on them.

 

[wasteyouryouth]

I already said that having a team called Jamaica isn’t suddenly going to bring back Andre Russell to play for them. He put up a story on instagram after Sammy’s appointment that he was ready to turn up for the West Indies at the request of the coach himself. Why do you think he didn’t do so in the end?

I brought up Barbados because their players are hilariously favoured in the selection policies. I’ve also said earlier that they would be one of the two or three nations that can put together a side capable of offering a game. However do you think a Barbados only side without some of the other West Indian players is suddenly going to perform better because they now play under a different name? Roston Chase will not suddenly turn into a competent player because he can drape his country’s flag after a game and sing their anthem (I’m pretty sure he can do either of those things already).

This accusation of the players lacking pride is sadly a baseless one. They may lack motivation but I’d wager that’s down to leadership issues rather than solely being a ‘West Indies as an entity doesn’t exist’ thing. They were decently competitive in South Africa just in March… a bilateral like that should give them even less motivation don’t you think? Yet they played much better cricket there than in the qualifiers.

The rest of your two posts seem wildly out of touch with the current reality and belong to a past long gone. Their current crop of players coming through seem more and more like FC specialists rather than white ball merchants because they haven’t been trained properly for the latter. Some of their players are in demand in certain leagues only because of a reputation of West Indian cricketers being good in T20s and not because they actually are. The other reason is because their development system also churns out multi-purpose cricketers alongside the FC specialists who you can fit into any XI you make which helps in balancing a XI when you have restrictions on overseas players.

But let's talk numbers to prove that perhaps these teams are also realising this harsh truth. The most recent IPL had a total of twelve players in ten teams. Four years ago that number was thirteen and this was with sixteen lesser overseas slots in the league. The current MLC tournament has just seven West Indian players in it (no jokes about some of the American ones being West Indian by origin allowed!) and this is in a league that is in the nearest region... if anyone should be selecting favouring players from these places it should be these American teams! If their players were interested in limited overs cricket only as you mention then why have they failed to turn up in two consecutive white ball tournament qualifiers?

And before you hit me with the reason being 'their stars are missing out'... no. Out of the ones that didn't turn up for the ODI qualifiers Lewis is the only one that would have made a difference. Hetmyer perhaps could but he was also terribly inconsistent in his final appearances for the national side. I saw him play in a few of those games and he looked downright terrible. He also failed to turn up for a flight to the last T20 WC twice (after the board arranged a second flight for him alone on his request) for entirely non-cricketing reasons. On top of that he is utterly unfit and has progressively gotten worse at that aspect too. Narine will get called for chucking the moment he plays any form of international cricket while Russell can barely stay fit for the numerous T20 leagues he wishes to turn up to. If you seriously think they need to recall the likes of semi-retired Gayle, Bravo and Pollard then I have a bridge to sell to you.



They do have a central contract system as far as I know. You acknowledge that they don't have the resources, refuse to give them more than what they should receive based on what they generate and also want them to force their players to have their right to work limited? If you start limiting their participation in overseas leagues (which is already low these days anyway) then they'll simply retire and continue doing the same like a decade ago. The only international players I can think of that are in demand in many leagues are Joseph, Hosein, Pooran, Mayers and maybe the likes of Holder, Charles (who don't deserve such a status in the first place), Powell and Odean plus Romario? None of these players have been actively skipping international duty on a consistent basis have they? I don't understand why you keep talking about Russell, Pollard, Narine and Bravo again. You trash the KKR duo in every post possible and yet you think they're the type of cricketers that would lift this West Indian side up again? Bravo's close to forty and since the last CPL the only official T20 games he's played are two games in the BPL. Pollard did play a season of PSL but he's also thirty-six, has never been a good ODI cricketer and doesn't bowl a lot these days. Again, is that the type of guy you want in inspiring players?

They do have an academy team, it participated in the List A tournament last year and is slated to do so again. It also played a couple of FC games against a collection of FC players. Some of their players are the ones with the most potential to do something special for the international team. The real issue lies with their individual domestic sides not picking youngsters and sticking with the same old domestic veterans. From what I know... each of them must have two Under-25 players in their sides and only two teams picked more than the requisite amount. They then refuse to play these blokes ahead of the established but mediocre cricketers and then promptly release them once they cross 25 like Leonardo Di Caprio. If by some miracle they keep performing in the lower levels of cricket then they get a redeemed opportunity when they're as old as the previously mediocre bunch but... they don't have the experience of the previous bunch either. Do you see the flaw in such a system?

Now all of this can be fixed with some political willpower and execution... alongside having the money to do it. They would need better people involved in these important roles responsible for such actions but you can't really blame them here either as they have constantly looked for new individuals to attempt new things at the highest positions (they have a new Director of Cricket starting from next month for example).

Evin Lewis chose to build his house over playing in the qualifier. But have you thought that if Trinidad & Tobago were there he would have done differently so he and Yannic Cariah can lead them to glory?

 

[Bevab]

Evin Lewis chose to build his house over playing in the qualifier. But have you thought that if Trinidad & Tobago were there he would have done differently so he and Yannic Cariah can lead them to glory?

If only there was an individual T&T side... Cariah's injury would have been magically healed!

 

[Bevab]

. Notice how Ireland doesn't get any of the ire despite having arguably similar or worse results in recent times because there is no weight of expectations on them.

Since posting this Ireland have lost two wickets to Italy in the European qualifiers for the next T20 WC.

Looks like a jinx has been put in place.

 

[wasteyouryouth]

If only there was an individual T&T side... Cariah's injury would have been magically healed!

To be honest I'm a bit worried about this Trinidad AND Tobago thing. Maybe they need to be disbanded before it gets out of hand.