Time to stop insulting Zim, Bang & the associates. There have always been "minnows"

[Deja moo]

I agree. Things are certainly looking good for Bangladesh. In fact, things have been looking good for them for 20 years now, ever since they played their first ODI.

Since that day in 1985, they have won 9 out of 106 ODIs. There is still the small matter of talent developing. But apparently 20 years is too short a period for a young team to develop.

 

[dudeurfriend]

Bangladesh a devoloping CRICKET NATION..........

 

[chaminda_00]

Bangladesh a devoloping CRICKET NATION..........

Yes they are a developing nation and they should be playing developing nations not Test Nations

 

[Hasib]

Well we thrashed Hong Kong last yr... and our "A" team has had a easy game against UAE (Im not getting excited about the UAE one as the series is far from over)


(ta)

 

[anzac]

just a quick question for the BD supporters..............

my last understanding from reading a recent article on CricWeb at the time of the NZL Tour to BAN, was that BAN no longer had a long version of the game in their domestic cricket, and that the domestic season was of a few months duration, and that the playing / training resources were pretty limited.........
I also read that BAN domestic cricket only achieved FC status post their introduction to Test cricket (but prior to the demise of the domestic 4 day comp), and that many of their current Test team senior players have not played any domestic cricket for several seasons!!!!!

can someone please advise what the current status is regarding all the above???

bottom line IMO if you do not have a domestic 4 day game with a solid infrastructure & resources then you should NOT be playing Test cricket..........you simply don't deserve to be on the same field as IMO you have not been paying enough respect to the game..............

likewise if your intnl players are not appearing in your domestic game then how do you expect to improve your standards - other countries like RSA had enough history at intnl level with a strong domestic comp to get thru'........

 

[Anil]

Nobody is saying that. Read my lines and stop barking!!!

All I have said that things are looking better for BD cricket and future will tell where we stand.

not barking mate...why do you say things are looking better for bd test cricket based on a one day win over india and a "test series" win over a severely weakened zim side? sure, the future will tell us where they stand in the future, it doesn't say where they stand now...

 

[crickmate]

The 4 day game did not happen on that particular year. Otherwise it is a regular event. As I told in my previous post, the current Bangladeshi board and selectors putting emohasize on domestic cricket, A Team and U-19 team, so situation is going to be more improved.

just a quick question for the BD supporters..............

my last understanding from reading a recent article on CricWeb at the time of the NZL Tour to BAN, was that BAN no longer had a long version of the game in their domestic cricket, and that the domestic season was of a few months duration, and that the playing / training resources were pretty limited.........
I also read that BAN domestic cricket only achieved FC status post their introduction to Test cricket (but prior to the demise of the domestic 4 day comp), and that many of their current Test team senior players have not played any domestic cricket for several seasons!!!!!

can someone please advise what the current status is regarding all the above???

 

[Langeveldt]

My main problem with these minnows are that one is the mouthpiece of a violent and oppressive political regime, and the other was promoted on the basis of a win in one ODI, which was suspicious in hindsight as well..

 

[Link]

i dont really have a problem wit the teams but just with the difference in standards. Their just cannon fodder for the big flight teams and dont really contest

 

[Triple Crown]

Cool to see this has inspired some constructive debate.

I agree thqt Bangladeshwas given Test status 2-3 years too early.

I also believe that Zimbabwe more than earned their Test status but have regressed under Mugabe'e regime, as has everything in the country.

The problem is the massive jump in standard between Associate & Test level.

And here's my solution:

The winner of the ICC Intercontinental Cup gets awarded TEMPORARY Test status & plays a 3-Test series against the LOWEST-ranked Test country at that time, as a reward and to gain experioence. The lowest ranked test nation would also get to see how far they have progressed from Associate standard.

This would provide a bridge to test level and playing the lowest ranked team would avoid mismatches like a possible horror situation like Canada V Australia.

And here's the cracker: Should the Test nation LOSE CONVINCINGLY to the Associate, the Associate would be promoted and the Test Country relegated from Test status.

How "lose convincingly" would be decided is a matter of argument, but a promotion/relegation system would clearly provide a better bridge to test level than the current situation which is too separated.

 

[chaminda_00]

Test cricket is not the place for emerging nation to develop, either is ODI. My solution is that BD, ZIm get dropped from Test Cricket and Kenya and the other get dropped from ODI status. These three should get 20Twenty Status along with the 5 quailifiers of the 2007 WC. These eight sides can play in 20Twenty Championship similar the Test and OD Championship. This will give them regular matches.

Also the InterCont. Cup should be expanded so they play 4 Day Games not 3 day and they should play more matches in this Cup. So these sides can fast track their 1st Class skills each team could play one home series against one of the 8 test Nations A teams.

Eight Teams is enough for Test Cricket, as the other sides would be playing International Cricket in the 20Twenty form. The key is that the emerging nations play more cricket aganist each other and A teams.

 

[Richard]

I would like to mention one thing, if the current system worked for India ,Srilanka, newzealand, why not Bangladesh.

Because times have changed - very quickly.
As far as Test-cricket is concerned, induction in the 1980s was comparable to induction in the 1930s.
It's totally different in the 2000s.

They have been playing competitive cricket for last two years. Give them some time.

No, they've occasionally been competing.

 

[Richard]

My main problem with these minnows are that one is the mouthpiece of a violent and oppressive political regime, and the other was promoted on the basis of a win in one ODI, which was suspicious in hindsight as well..

Mine are those combined with the fact that they damage the integrity of ODI and Test-cricket.

 

[Richard]

I agree. Things are certainly looking good for Bangladesh. In fact, things have been looking good for them for 20 years now, ever since they played their first ODI.

Since that day in 1985, they have won 9 out of 106 ODIs. There is still the small matter of talent developing. But apparently 20 years is too short a period for a young team to develop.

Very, very well put.
Not at all dissimilar to the Vaughan-ODIs sitution.
All the time it's "just a bit more time... just a bit more..."
You can only go on like that for some time - and IMO in both cases time is up. We can now say conclusively that Bangladesh should not have been promoted when they were and are not good enough for ODI and Test-cricket; we can also say that Vaughan is not good enough for ODIs.

 

[Langeveldt]

Mine are those combined with the fact that they damage the integrity of ODI and Test-cricket.

Ah but who's listening Richard! Keep those dollars rolling in hey?

 

[Richard]

Err........ eh?

 

[Langeveldt]

Err........ eh?

Basically saying that crickets only priority now is money..

Not the integrity of test or one day cricket, or the risk of taking the moral high ground

 

[Richard]

Right.
And it's impossible to express my feelings on it.
Nearest I can come is

Anglophobia appears to play a small part in certain affairs, too.

 

[C_C]

Mine are those combined with the fact that they damage the integrity of ODI and Test-cricket.

Intersting.
Bangladesh has registered their first test victory a HELLUVA LONG TIME BEFORE new zealand and South africa did.
I guess they didnt damage the integrity of test cricket for oh gawd knows how many years, eh ?

I agree though that Test cricket is not the stage to develop cricket......but you dont develop either unless you face top opposition.
So if ya wanna revoke BD and ZIM's test status, they should figure in the ICC five year plan and play other test teams with FC status.

 

[Richard]

Intersting.
Bangladesh has registered their first test victory a HELLUVA LONG TIME BEFORE new zealand and South africa did.
I guess they didnt damage the integrity of test cricket for oh gawd knows how many years, eh ?

Who gives a flying f*ck how many years it was? SJS has already shown quite clearly that the number of matches is already more than New Zealand et al.
And it's number of matches, not years, that matter - because careers don't go in years, they go in matches.