ian chappell's idea

[al Furqaan]

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/extr...ry/311030.html

asides from stripping BD of test status, i agree with him all the way.

[Duck]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/extr...ry/311030.html

asides from stripping BD of test status, i agree with him all the way.

If he says so, I will discard all of his sweet words!

I have little doubt playing T20 will be a good source of players suited for longer version, I mean Test!

For Years they were screaming about too much ODI spoiled us and we are not good for Test! And now he is asking for playing T20 for the name of GLobalization! Hah! Sweeeet !

[Gowza]

i don't like the idea of reducing the 50 over world cup to 10 teams because although it can be boring watching the minnows get thrashed i think it's important for these teams to be exposed to top level cricket, otherwise they won't get better. if the top teams actually played the minnows in series' outside of the world cup then it would be fine to leave the minnows out of the world cup because they're still getting the exposure to top cricket but atm that doesn't happen often enough.

i disagree with having only the 8 major nations playing test cricket, does that mean only 8 at any one time can play test cricket? i.e. if a team is good enough to be granted test status does that mean one of the already test playing nations test status has to be revoked? doesn't sound very good to me.

the 2nd tier competition of 4 day games is intriguing to me, i think it's a good idea because it would get teams more ready to make the jump to test status. but they already have the unofficial test matches for the A teams, which is somewhat already a 2nd tier competition, what they could do is have some non-test playing nations play the A teams of the test playing nations in 4 day matches. if they included A teams of the test nations then it should improve the quality of the competition which would help the non-test nations even more to be ready for test status.

as for T20 showing the minnows can compete and create upsets, well yes a couple of the minnows can do that, if they expanded the competition i doubt there would be many more if any more upsets from minnows. i mean when he says minnows he's referring to zimbabwe and bangladesh and i wouldn't consider them minnows at this point (they're inbetween the minnows and the top teams). so none of the true minnows have created upsets in this tournament.

[mafizraju]

Well its a good idea and I think may solve the cash problem.

However for minnows to develop into a better Test or ODi playing country two things are needed: money and exposure. T20 can solve the money problem. And regarding exposure ICC should have a FTP incorporating A teams and under 19 teams where top test playing nations will have to send and invite A teams regularly to Bangladesh, Zimbabwe(to face their A teams and under 19) and other associate teams like Ireland, Scotland, Kenya. Associate countries will have to tour each other as well. It can be arranged as a Championship over two years or so. That way the international teams will not be burnt out at the same time the development will go on as well

[IanW]

The bigger issue with 8 teams is that what happens when India have a bad 5 years and drop out of the top 8 ? Similarly, a bad 5 years by the West Indies (and they are real close to Bangladesh for 8th in the world) could kill the game in the Caribbean.

No, the solution is to spend that filthy lucre on more A tours, and on more tours by developing countries. I mean, how many 4 day games have Ireland, Scotland, Kenya and Bangladesh played in calendar year 2007 ?

Ian Whitchurch

[Sohel]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/extr...ry/311030.html

asides from stripping BD of test status, i agree with him all the way.

Me too.

[Puck]

i don't see the point of stripping the banger's test status. it should not have been granted in the first place. however, now that bangladesh is a test team, icc should be doing all the more to ensure that they can perform to the reasonable standard.

as for 50 over internationals, i think bangers won three matches to prove their worth in the last world cup. that statistics is likely to improve as players mature and play against better opposition. i would indeed reduce the number of teams playing world cup 50/50. there ought to be qualification rounds. rather than organising formal qualification tournaments, the 8 teams who have the highest winning percentage in one day internationals should be playing at the world cup. i would certainly introduce a seeding system so that beating a team like australia would get a lesser team like bangladesh more points than beating the likes of mugabelanders. the 50/50 world cup competition should be intense and played over 2-3 weeks.

the 20/20 competition should have as many teams in multiples of 4 as possible. usa, canada, bahamas, bhutan or whoever plays cricket can take part in this. it's a bit of fun and matters little who wins.

[Puck]

Originally Posted by IanW
The bigger issue with 8 teams is that what happens when India have a bad 5 years and drop out of the top 8 ? Similarly, a bad 5 years by the West Indies (and they are real close to Bangladesh for 8th in the world) could kill the game in the Caribbean.

No, the solution is to spend that filthy lucre on more A tours, and on more tours by developing countries. I mean, how many 4 day games have Ireland, Scotland, Kenya and Bangladesh played in calendar year 2007 ?

Ian Whitchurch

the game in the carribean is already hald dead. unless they could produce one more world class batsman and bowler in the same generation, there would not be any west indies cricket test representation in 20 years time. i would expect the likes of bangers to take over the likes of west indies as there is more interest amongst youngsters there to sustain the game.