STLIndian
Club Cricketer
It's close, but at this point, Bangladesh is still better.
Is Ireland better than Bangladesh??
- Thread starter rockyrakster
- Start date
DJ Ager
International Cricketer
Bangladesh have improved loads, proving it with yesterday's test win against West Indies, however they and Ireland are evenly matched really, perhaps Banglades a tad better, much like Kenya up until after WC2003. What went against Kenya, and may do with Ireland, is the lack of a proper test match venue and strong domestic structure, although some may argue the same with Bangladesh pre 2000, although they do have large stadia.
I think with Ireland's wins against Bangladesh, much like Bangladesh's against the likes of West Indies and India, is the role of the underdogs with a sniff against a complacent/nervous opposition of the chance of a shock. Having said that, logically Ireland may deserve test status, like Bangladesh, although their rise has been very rapid.
I think with Ireland's wins against Bangladesh, much like Bangladesh's against the likes of West Indies and India, is the role of the underdogs with a sniff against a complacent/nervous opposition of the chance of a shock. Having said that, logically Ireland may deserve test status, like Bangladesh, although their rise has been very rapid.
Bangladesh was screwed up under Ash and reached its low against Ireland recently.
Look what a change of captaincy can do. Not because they won against the West Indies. But the way the whole team responded. Almost every player had some contribution towards the win.
Ireland has improved by leaps and bounds. They are not at par with Bangladesh yet although I think some of the batsman looks more solid than ours.
Readers should realize Bangladesh are playing without 3 KEY players: Nafees, Aftab (A word class One day Player) and Kapali - A talented all rounder.
The last 2 can singlehandedly win games for Bangladesh.
We saw the fireworks of Kapali and Aftab in ICl matches and prior to that in many onedayers. On their day they can demolish any attack in the world.
That these two guys have not been selected against West Indies belies logic.
That is poor,stone age thinking.
If and when Bangladesh plays full strength against Ireland they will win easily.
However without these experienced guys it would be a case of 50 - 50.
I was very impressed by Ireland's peformance in the ICC World twenty20 games.
Not because they knocked out Bangladesh which was more because of irresponsible batting than good balls but their ability to push pretty much all oppositions to the brink. Very impressive indeed!
At the rate they are improvng they will soon become a force to reckon with.
Look what a change of captaincy can do. Not because they won against the West Indies. But the way the whole team responded. Almost every player had some contribution towards the win.
Ireland has improved by leaps and bounds. They are not at par with Bangladesh yet although I think some of the batsman looks more solid than ours.
Readers should realize Bangladesh are playing without 3 KEY players: Nafees, Aftab (A word class One day Player) and Kapali - A talented all rounder.
The last 2 can singlehandedly win games for Bangladesh.
We saw the fireworks of Kapali and Aftab in ICl matches and prior to that in many onedayers. On their day they can demolish any attack in the world.
That these two guys have not been selected against West Indies belies logic.
That is poor,stone age thinking.
If and when Bangladesh plays full strength against Ireland they will win easily.
However without these experienced guys it would be a case of 50 - 50.
I was very impressed by Ireland's peformance in the ICC World twenty20 games.
Not because they knocked out Bangladesh which was more because of irresponsible batting than good balls but their ability to push pretty much all oppositions to the brink. Very impressive indeed!
At the rate they are improvng they will soon become a force to reckon with.
Last edited:
Yeah good point there, bring back Nafees, Aftab and Kapali. The team really needs them back atm cause players like Junaid Siddique, Raqibul and Mahmudullah (He is a good bowler though) have lots of flaws in their techniques and they are still not good enough to play test cricket.
The simple answer to the question is why don't the ICC structure Tests to have multiple divisions and then Ireland may well play Tests against Bangladesh? And Zimbabwe's status could be restored, but they couldn't be in Div One until circumstances change sufficiently (like the stadia requirements for promotion from the conference in English football)
sumfink loik :
Div One : Australia, England, Pakistan, South Africa, India, Sri Lanka
Div Two : New Zealand, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, West Indies, Ireland, Kenya
Div Three : Scotland, Holland, Canada, Namibia, USA, Bermuda
Div Four : UAE, Denmark........................... etc
Promotion of one team up and down at the end of a cycle. Tests would have to be standardised to say best of three or four (since Tests can be draws, three no more guarantees a result in the series than four does) Therein lies the sticking point, if forced to play all countries in equal numbers of Tests and not play series like the Ashes as best of five, the countries would kick up a fuss. On the flip side, those countries who don't give Bangladesh the time of day wouldn't have to unless they got demoted or Bangladesh got promoted. And maybe cricket would rise in popularity as their is no tangible start or end to the Test championship, it is just ongoing series after series with a team ranked top. It would also give other countries a chance to improve and their fans something to look at, rather than just if their country is involved in the ICC Trophy (qualifier for the World Cup) or the World Cup itself.
sumfink loik :
Div One : Australia, England, Pakistan, South Africa, India, Sri Lanka
Div Two : New Zealand, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, West Indies, Ireland, Kenya
Div Three : Scotland, Holland, Canada, Namibia, USA, Bermuda
Div Four : UAE, Denmark........................... etc
Promotion of one team up and down at the end of a cycle. Tests would have to be standardised to say best of three or four (since Tests can be draws, three no more guarantees a result in the series than four does) Therein lies the sticking point, if forced to play all countries in equal numbers of Tests and not play series like the Ashes as best of five, the countries would kick up a fuss. On the flip side, those countries who don't give Bangladesh the time of day wouldn't have to unless they got demoted or Bangladesh got promoted. And maybe cricket would rise in popularity as their is no tangible start or end to the Test championship, it is just ongoing series after series with a team ranked top. It would also give other countries a chance to improve and their fans something to look at, rather than just if their country is involved in the ICC Trophy (qualifier for the World Cup) or the World Cup itself.
Thta's a real good way to kill test cricket in New Zealand. Who in there right mind would find playing the West Indies the best test series of the year, it's a stupid idea.
Oh and ROFL at Aftab being a World Class One Day Player haha.
chainsnatcher
School Cricketer
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Online Cricket Games Owned
-
Certainly I feel Bang should not be a test playing nation....They make a decent ODI side though but Ireland would whoop their arse on a fair wicket on any given day in any format of the game....
