• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Should Bangladesh And Zimbabwe Be Stripped Of Their Test Status?

BARMY_LAD

Cricket Spectator
I am not the first to say it... and I certainly won't be the last!
DEMOTE BANGLADESH AND ZIMBABWE FROM TEST STATUS!
They should both be playing first class matches against 'A' teams, County sides (and other respectable first class sides in the remaining 8 test playing countries) in order to prove their worth! At the moment Test players averages are being unjustly boosted which, in turn, is making a mockery of our great game!

What are your thoughts on the matter?
 

shaka

International Regular
What about dropping Zimbabwe until Mugabe is out of office :D
 
Last edited:

Steulen

International Regular
BARMY_LAD said:
I am not the first to say it... and I certainly won't be the last!
DEMOTE BANGLADESH AND ZIMBABWE FROM TEST STATUS!
They should both be playing first class matches against 'A' teams, County sides (and other respectable first class sides in the remaining 8 test playing countries) in order to prove their worth! At the moment Test players averages are being unjustly boosted which, in turn, is making a mockery of our great game!

What are your thoughts on the matter?
No.

Make tiers instead. Let Bangladesh and Zimbabwe play Kenya, Namibia, Canada, Scotland, Ireland and The Netherlands in a second tier. Once every while, the best of the second tier gets to play the Windies...urr, I meant the worst of the first tier..for the right to play Group A Test cricket.

Abolish the distinction between countries in ODI's. An international one-day match is an international one-day match is an ODI, whether it's Switzerland vs. Slovenia or Australia vs. England. Cricket is the only international sport that still has these eligibility issues, like an English gentlemen's club.
The old colonial thinking that cricket is still saturated with drives me mad.
 

age_master

Hall of Fame Member
i think Zimbabwe should be outed till thier political system regains some respect (ie becomes Mugabe-less) but i dont think that Bangladesh should lose their status, honestly i think that they will start winning alot more games in the next few years - they have some good young players, who i reakon, under Whatmore, could do quite well :)
 

deeps

International 12th Man
Samuel_Vimes said:
Robert Gabriel Mugabe (born February 21, 1924)

He's 81, with any luck he'll die soon...

lol, hopefully

but in answer to the question...YES

far too many "easy" runs being scored, and easy wickets.

modern day batsmans way of inflating their averages, which the players of past era's haven't had.


The amazing thing is that all these years, australia has played 2 tests against zim and 3 against bangladesh. most other teams have played them alot more. How did the aussies miss out? and yet their winning% and bowling and batting avgs are still highly impressive.
 

C_C

International Captain
If Bangladesh or Zimbabwe are banished for lack of quality, for the sake of consistency, one must erase the first 20 years of South African cricketing records and all records of opposition players made against South Africa and do the same for the first 15-20 years of Kiwi cricket, first 20-25 years of Indian cricket and first 10-20 years of west indies cricket and the first 10 years of sri lankan cricket.
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
deeps said:
lol, hopefully

but in answer to the question...YES

far too many "easy" runs being scored, and easy wickets.

modern day batsmans way of inflating their averages, which the players of past era's haven't had.


The amazing thing is that all these years, australia has played 2 tests against zim and 3 against bangladesh. most other teams have played them alot more. How did the aussies miss out? and yet their winning% and bowling and batting avgs are still highly impressive.
Here we go, again, past era players DID have new teams to beat up on. You think Test cricket started in the 19th century with England, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and the West Indies all playing each other?
 

Nate

You'll Never Walk Alone
C_C said:
If Bangladesh or Zimbabwe are banished for lack of quality, for the sake of consistency, one must erase the first 20 years of South African cricketing records and all records of opposition players made against South Africa and do the same for the first 15-20 years of Kiwi cricket, first 20-25 years of Indian cricket and first 10-20 years of west indies cricket and the first 10 years of sri lankan cricket.
Hear, here!

Mind you, there are many grounds for a basis of an arguement, and that is only one. :)
 

Chubb

International Regular
Zimbabwe shouldn't be banned outright because it isn't the player's fault that the crisis has occured. There's a lot to say for tiers but I think another solution would be to stop them touring anyone other than Bangladesh and Kenya, Namibia etc. then they'd get some test exposure, maybe two games a year and more games against the minor countries to help their development. I wouldn't stop Bangladesh from touring because that country has a big future. Zimbabwe has no future to look forward to whilst the country's in such a state.
 

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
deeps said:
The amazing thing is that all these years, australia has played 2 tests against zim and 3 against bangladesh. most other teams have played them alot more. How did the aussies miss out? and yet their winning% and bowling and batting avgs are still highly impressive.
Perhaps that shows that in the large scheme of things, it really doesn't matter?
 

Nate

You'll Never Walk Alone
Samuel_Vimes said:
Perhaps that shows that in the large scheme of things, it really doesn't matter?
The way I see things, there are two options.

Option One: There are secret meetings being held with every other country organising this behind Australia`s back. The meetings are held in Bob`s bedroom, and in return for the space, they compliment his defenz liek dravid. They do this in hope, that one day, World XI teams will be picked on averages and Australia won`t get any members in.

Option Two: In the large scheme of things, it really doesn't matter?
 

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
I do agree with what CC, Nnanden and Scaly piscine are saying in terms of the fact that they have always been below par teams, but IMO 8 teams is enough for Test Cricket. Also for teams like Scotland, Kenya, NL, Nambia, Canada etc to improve they need move games against BD and ZIM. BD and ZIM will still improve playing these teams and 'A' Teams, so their no reason IMO to keep them playing Test Cricket, when their is a better options. Dropping BD and Zimbabwe to a 2nd Teir will improve the standard of cricket across below the top 8, sometimes you have to think about other teams and best way for them to improve not just two teams. Keeping BD and Zimbabwe in Test Cricket only helps two teams, but dropping them back to a 2nd Tier helps 4 to 8 Teams.
 

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
chaminda_00 said:
But IMO 8 teams is enough for Test Cricket
Want to expand on the reasoning behind that a bit? I thought a worthy goal would be to get as many nations up to Test standard as possible...
 

Kweek

Cricketer Of The Year
Samuel_Vimes said:
Robert Gabriel Mugabe (born February 21, 1924)

He's 81, with any luck he'll die soon...
and then ? dont you think mugabe got the next man for the job..who does the same thing ?
 

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
kwek said:
and then ? dont you think mugabe got the next man for the job..who does the same thing ?
Hopefully, he won't be as strong, and there'll be some opposition. There's good evidence (especially from African countries) that once a dictator dies, the successor can't keep up the pressure.

*crosses fingers*
 

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
Samuel_Vimes said:
Want to expand on the reasoning behind that a bit? I thought a worthy goal would be to get as many nations up to Test standard as possible...
True but their no point in having teams play Test Cricket, just for the sack of it. Personally i think if want to expand cricket you can do it in ODI, only lets sides play Test Cricket when they are truelly ready.
 

Jamee999

Hall of Fame Member
Is there any other sports that doesn't let rubbish teams play with the big countries?

I mean in Football, England have to go to San Marino or Azerbijan, why shoudn't South Africa have to go and play Cricket in Dijibouti?
 

Top