||||Who will be the eleventh test playing team|||

[IndYeah]

Originally Posted by Tigers_eye
Ireland is not Bangladesh. They are light years forward than what BD was in 1999.

We basically didn't have any structure before 2005. All Dhaka based club cricket and eye-washed regional picnic cricket.

With the status, (1) they get the funding to make a better infra structure where it would produce the Mustafizs, the Sabbirs, the Sarkars, the Taskins from the U-15s, U-17s, U-19s, Academies.

(2) They would gain the necessary experience to compete with the Aussies and the English.

One game here, one game there; 3 games in the WC if they qualify, wouldn't improve their standard. This would mean a permanent stop in the English poaching as well. (Morgan, Rankin etc.)

By all means, top ranked associates should get a fat bump in funding. And a lot more short format games - all I'm saying is, test status should not be the means to give them that. That should be the final step in development. ICC needs to create a structured pathway with Test status as the last milestone.

Bear in mind, just giving a team money and more games is not automatically going to make them a regular cricket playing nation - the game needs to have developed sustainable roots in the country - with a sizeable player pool and fan-base - both of native birth and origin. You can't just suck at the ICC teat for funding - a majority of it has to be self-generated - from domestic cricket. But the ICC should really help these countries create such a self-sustaining base - kind-of like a venture captial investor. At the moment, they are acting like 19th Century Maharajas, doling out a few dollars here and there, with no proper planning and follow-through.

[Tigers_eye]

Originally Posted by IndYeah
By all means, top ranked associates should get a fat bump in funding. And a lot more short format games - all I'm saying is, test status should not be the means to give them that. That should be the final step in development. ICC needs to create a structured pathway with Test status as the last milestone.

Saying is easy, but what would be that milestone when no one wants to play them in fear of losing valuable ranking points or don't have the window in their schedule to play them. How are you going test that milestone? Once in every 4 years in a WC or one home game against England ever summer wouldn't cut it. And it is not the longer version anyways.

Bear in mind, just giving a team money and more games is not automatically going to make them a regular cricket playing nation - the game needs to have developed sustainable roots in the country - with a sizeable player pool and fan-base - both of native birth and origin. You can't just suck at the ICC teat for funding - a majority of it has to be self-generated - from domestic cricket. But the ICC should really help these countries create such a self-sustaining base - kind-of like a venture captial investor. At the moment, they are acting like 19th Century Maharajas, doling out a few dollars here and there, with no proper planning and follow-through.

Chicken or egg, which came first?

Since we saw, a terrible unprepared team like BD making it to some standard and finally getting consistent because of the enormous amount of funding tells us the funding needs to happen first. Without it, it wouldn't work. See Kenya. Since Ireland team is in much better positioned now than BD was in 1999, it is high time to stand beside them. We the members wouldn't do it UNLESS it is mandated by the ICC and we are forced to play them.

If there is another way to fund them and not give the test status or give a probation status where they would play every A team home and away (funded by the ICC or members) in certain period of time, then I am all for it.

[IndYeah]

Originally Posted by Tigers_eye
Since we saw, a terrible unprepared team like BD making it to some standard and finally getting consistent because of the enormous amount of funding tells us the funding needs to happen first. Without it, it wouldn't work. See Kenya. Since Ireland team is in much better positioned now than BD was in 1999, it is high time to stand beside them. We the members wouldn't do it UNLESS it is mandated by the ICC and we are forced to play them.

Bangladesh did not just succeed because of funding, I think that's unfair to the deep fan base that Bangladesh has had for cricket for decades.

Originally Posted by Tigers_eye
If there is another way to fund them and not give the test status or give a probation status where they would play every A team home and away (funded by the ICC or members) in certain period of time, then I am all for it.

That's what I'm saying, ICC needs to create an intermediate status and a bridge from associate to top-level, rewarding the upcoming teams with more money and games and also exposure to domestic and 'A' teams. They owe the game of cricket that. Every year, the ICC should pay for at least one associate team to join a domestic competition in one of the test nations. This would avoid the whole ranking risk issue you talk about.

As an Indian, I believe BCCI should take the lead on this - we have enough grounds, teams, infrastructure and a mature domestic competition that offers so many options to accommodate guest teams - be it Challenger, Deodhar, Vijay Hazare, or Syed Mushtaq Ali tournament. Heck even Buchi babu tournament would be good - Kiwis have sent guest teams for Buchi babu before.