Does Bangladesh deserve the Test status?

[Deepanjan]

They have improved a lot in ODI cricket in recent years. But does Bangladesh provide enough proof of ability in Test matches? or should they take a break like Zimbabwe

http://sportpulse.net/content/cricke...st-status-9119

Would hate to see Shakib and Tamim not play it ..

[Zeeshan]

Let's hear YOUR version of the story other than the astutely acute detailed observation that "the recent events have only made it clear that Bangladesh cricket is just not ready to mix it with the big boys over five days".

[Isnaad]

I like how this same question gets asked, debated and used 101 times between every Test series Bangladesh gets to play. May be India were better off losing theirs back in the 1940s. Ohh wait a minute, they are a powerhouse now!

[Zeeshan]

Well Technically our homeboy is from USA, so Isnaad you gotta bash the American Cricket Team.

[Isnaad]

Originally Posted by Zeeshan
Well Technically our homeboy is from USA, so Isnaad you gotta bash the American Cricket Team.

I'm using India as an example. The thread opener's location really does not matter here because, lets face it, he is not the first and by no means the last to question our Test status.

But regardless of that, let us take a minute from our lives and pay due respect to the thread opener for spending his priceless time in writing the masterpiece. It's really really nice to see so many people caring about Bangladeshi cricket from the bottom of their hearts.

[Deepanjan]

Originally Posted by Isnaad
I like how this same question gets asked, debated and used 101 times between every Test series Bangladesh gets to play. May be India were better off losing theirs back in the 1940s. Ohh wait a minute, they are a powerhouse now!

Nothing personal against BD. And btw, India and NZ had no ODI, T20, A Tours or IPL to get familiar with conditions all over the world, but they STILL won more tests by the time they had played 77 test matches ( 8 for India, 9 for NZ). And these were spanned over 30 years, long enough to lose an entire generation of players to form and age, unlike 13 years. Fight the argument with logic, not magic Harry Potter does not do cricket.

You can bash me for my nationality - does not matter. Neither do i support most of the strong-arm tactics ICC and BCCI do, i despise how they use money to buy things out, but does that really mean Bangladesh are half-decent at test cricket? Stats don't reveal everything, but I would always invite a proper debate with good arguments to counter these

[Zeeshan]

Two-words Deepanjan-da,
Six
hundred

[Zeeshan]

shikhe nin apnara shikhe nin, kibhabe mithiye mithiye chaykha dite hoy kata ghaye

[mufi_02]

wait, so the thread opener is also the author of the article? by thee bye, give me some time and I will come up with logic (not to be confused with magic) and stats.

[Isnaad]

Originally Posted by Deepanjan
Nothing personal against BD. And btw, India and NZ had no ODI, T20, A Tours or IPL to get familiar with conditions all over the world, but they STILL won more tests by the time they had played 77 test matches ( 8 for India, 9 for NZ). And these were spanned over 30 years, long enough to lose an entire generation of players to form and age, unlike 13 years. Fight the argument with logic, not magic Harry Potter does not do cricket.

You can bash me for my nationality - does not matter. Neither do i support most of the strong-arm tactics ICC and BCCI do, i despise how they use money to buy things out, but does that really mean Bangladesh are half-decent at test cricket? Stats don't reveal everything, but I would always invite a proper debate with good arguments to counter these

You are reading way beyond the line. If anything, I was praising people's patience back then for sticking with and believing in India despite their repeated failures. The fruit is evident and visible.

You wanted logic, you will get logic.

If 8 and 9 wins out of 77 helps you dictate terms over 4 wins out of 77, that too in an era where 8 of the top teams playing Test cricket are respectively 136, 136, 124, 85, 83, 81, 61 and 31 years experienced, then it is rather facepalm-worthy that you're even getting yourself into this comparison.

And ODI, T20, IPL help improve Test skills in what way exactly?

[jashan83]

I just hate this Test Status thing of ICC. It seems they still live back in the Colonial times. There is nothing like this in any other sport. For me, if 2 teams play a 5 day match as per standard ICC Rules (Rules defined by ICC on Ground, Pitch, Nationality of players, Umpiring & Scoring), then it should be a Test Match. It can be Aus V BD or Afg V Nep. This pick and choose thing is most pathetic

[WorldCup11]

Honestly it was a good read, lots of fact. I am surprised that you even know names like Rabiul Islam and Sohag Gazi. Whatever you wrote about Shakib and remainig crappy bowlers and batsman I agree 100%.

However one thing I don't agree is the title and your conclusion. How come you say something like that by just looking at the stats? Don't your heart tells you passion for this game is capable enough of producing more Shakibs?my one tells me just one more genuine wicket taking bowler will change upcoming stats significantly but stop playing test won't help. If you have a heart, can't you see the steady improvement Bangladesh made over the years even though stats will say we are dreamers?

I can see some similarity between your article and that old guy (Boycott) , even thouh he is 72 and you are 27. He too starts with a fart and ends with another one. Where is the air freshener?

[Isnaad]

Originally Posted by WorldCup11
If you have a heart, can't you see the steady improvement Bangladesh made over the years even though stats will say we are dreamers.

Our bowling stats will say we are dreamers.

Our recent batting stats will even astonish the likes of Boycott.

[BengaliPagol]

I think we deserve test status. Ektu shomay dao.

[Gowza]

i think if BD got to play a similar amount of test matches per year as the other test nations then BD would be closer in competition to them. they've been doing enough in tests of recent to show the ability to compete with the better teams on a more regular basis is there, but if they're playing half as many test matches as other nations then they're missing out on a lot of experience. i've no doubt the likes of shakib, tamim, nasir and mushy would be clearly test standard batsmen if given the opportunity to play more.

[tejkuni]

Originally Posted by Deepanjan
Nothing personal against BD. And btw, India and NZ had no ODI, T20, A Tours or IPL to get familiar with conditions all over the world, but they STILL won more tests by the time they had played 77 test matches ( 8 for India, 9 for NZ). And these were spanned over 30 years, long enough to lose an entire generation of players to form and age, unlike 13 years. Fight the argument with logic, not magic ----------

NZ won their first Test after 26 years (when their 4th generation of players were playing). Besides, that time there were no pressure of money,media,fan, etc. England, Australia and WI used to send their 2nd team to NZ. Once England sent two teams to Australia and NZ at the same time. I thing because of the Test status we have more sponsors, fan interest, etc. Test status has given the chance to BD players to play against the best players of the world. In other words Test status has helped BD cricket in my opinion.

[Tiger444]

Originally Posted by Gowza
i think if BD got to play a similar amount of test matches per year as the other test nations then BD would be closer in competition to them. they've been doing enough in tests of recent to show the ability to compete with the better teams on a more regular basis is there, but if they're playing half as many test matches as other nations then they're missing out on a lot of experience. i've no doubt the likes of shakib, tamim, nasir and mushy would be clearly test standard batsmen if given the opportunity to play more.

Couldn't agree more I also blame the fact that BCB is not more proactive in getting more Test matches. We can blame ICC for the unfairness but in the we end up being the losers since we rarely play Tests. Like this upcoming NZ series, why couldn't it be a 3 Test series? We complain about not not getting enough Tests and yet we're just playing 2 Tests? So a lot of blame goes on BCB as well here.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by Deepanjan
Nothing personal against BD. And btw, India and NZ had no ODI, T20, A Tours or IPL to get familiar with conditions all over the world, but they STILL won more tests by the time they had played 77 test matches ( 8 for India, 9 for NZ). And these were spanned over 30 years, long enough to lose an entire generation of players to form and age, unlike 13 years. Fight the argument with logic, not magic Harry Potter does not do cricket.

You can bash me for my nationality - does not matter. Neither do i support most of the strong-arm tactics ICC and BCCI do, i despise how they use money to buy things out, but does that really mean Bangladesh are half-decent at test cricket? Stats don't reveal everything, but I would always invite a proper debate with good arguments to counter these

Are Bangladesh half decent in Test cricket? Probably not even close. Its true India or NZ didn't get the benefit of playing ODIs or T20s "all over the world", but Bangladesh haven't exactly had to have their passports renewed due to filled up pages. Our last match of any sort in Australia was in 2008, in England in 2010, in South Africa in 2008, NZ in 2010, and India in 1998. And all those tours combined for a paltry 16 ODIs and just 5 Tests.

Further, I'm sure India in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s got to play several first class matches on tour immediately before their Tests. Far better prep than some T20s 2 years before a Test series like we get.

Even after that, India in the 90s won just a single away Test, and that too in Zimbabwe of all places, I think. If Bangladesh go through the 2050s with just a single away Test win, and that too against the relative minnow of that distant decade, we can talk.

Till then lets all agree to abandon "logic" in favor of jadu.

[ReZ_1]

Originally Posted by jashan83
I just hate this Test Status thing of ICC. It seems they still live back in the Colonial times. There is nothing like this in any other sport. For me, if 2 teams play a 5 day match as per standard ICC Rules (Rules defined by ICC on Ground, Pitch, Nationality of players, Umpiring & Scoring), then it should be a Test Match. It can be Aus V BD or Afg V Nep. This pick and choose thing is most pathetic

Did you forget about icl? how icc and bcci conspired against them. I also wonder if they do believe that they are still back there which is well reflected by their actions.

just to get clear what is the role of icc other than organizing matches and give moderate prize money with respect to today's prize money given by other sponsors.

[Naimul_Hd]

[Night_wolf]

KDPP, kotheke ase asob

celebrate your Champions trophy tramp, forget about us

[Rabz]

[Zeeshan]

Well technically there are four dynasties:

chin dynasty, shang dynasty, tongue dynasty, and jo dynasty

ekhon op konta nibe ei holo kotha

[Rinathq]

Originally Posted by Isnaad
You are reading way beyond the line. If anything, I was praising people's patience back then for sticking with and believing in India despite their repeated failures. The fruit is evident and visible.

You wanted logic, you will get logic.

If 8 and 9 wins out of 77 helps you dictate terms over 4 wins out of 77, that too in an era where 8 of the top teams playing Test cricket are respectively 136, 136, 124, 85, 83, 81, 61 and 31 years experienced, then it is rather facepalm-worthy that you're even getting yourself into this comparison.

And ODI, T20, IPL help improve Test skills in what way exactly?

this answered the whole article right there

[MohammedC]

Originally Posted by Naimul_Hd

Same feeling when I saw the thread title. Always had to be an Indian who opens such thread.