• 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.

The next nation to be granted Test status

Next test nation


  • Total voters
    38

Hurricane

Hall of Fame Member
The nations represented? It's not a perfect solution, but it's one that could actually work. If the team gets too full with players from one nation, then make that nation a test team too. Imho, it's perfect for development. Mixed teams aren't exactly a new thing for Cricket.
What language would they all speak? How would they communicate - would they go for a beer together?
 

KiWiNiNjA

International Coach
I was going to pick Ireland before realising that England will end up nicking all their good players.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
I was going to pick Ireland before realising that England will end up nicking all their good players.
That's probably the best reason for Ireland to seek Full Member Status, even if that doesn't confer Test playing rights. A place on the FTP for more regular ODIs and taking away England's ability to cherrypick their best players makes most sense for Irish cricket.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
That's probably the best reason for Ireland to seek Full Member Status, even if that doesn't confer Test playing rights. A place on the FTP for more regular ODIs and taking away England's ability to cherrypick their best players makes most sense for Irish cricket.
Might adversely affect their players' development too. If Irish cricketers weren't technically available to be called up for England they wouldn't be able to play over here as domestics and I'd bet far fewer counties would take a punt if they had to register them as overseas.
 

G.I.Joe

International Coach
1. English
2. By talking.
3. Occasionally.

Hurricane with the hard questions.
haha

Funfacts:

Distance between Kabul and Dhaka is 2300 kms. Distance between Delhi and Chennai is 2100 kms.
Bangladesh and Afghanistan have 4 major* languages amongst themselves. India has 30 major languages.



*minimum 1 million speakers
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Might adversely affect their players' development too. If Irish cricketers weren't technically available to be called up for England they wouldn't be able to play over here as domestics and I'd bet far fewer counties would take a punt if they had to register them as overseas.
I'll admit I'm not up to speed on the regulations of the County Championship, but wouldn't their status as EU citizens, as well as their rights as Irish citizens to live and work in the UK over-ride that?

Surely Northern Irishmen who hold UK passports wouldn't be treated as overseas players either?
 

Howe_zat

Audio File
I'll admit I'm not up to speed on the regulations of the County Championship, but wouldn't their status as EU citizens, as well as their rights as Irish citizens to live and work in the UK over-ride that?

Surely Northern Irishmen who hold UK passports wouldn't be treated as overseas players either?
The ECB overseas player ruling works completely differently from the legal work permits, though. Thanks to a great deal of reactionary nonsense over Kolpak players, It's done in some way to do with whether or not said player qualifies or intends to qualify for England representation.

Take Iain O'Brien for example, who - having lived here for several years and is married to an English woman - was recently stopped from playing for Middlesex as a domestic player. He commented on his blog that he could have worked as anything from a fireman to a CEO, but the ECB decided couldn't play county cricket, because he was still eligible to play for NZ, and thus not England.
 
Last edited:

BoyBrumby

Englishman
The ECB overseas player ruling works completely differently from the legal work permits, though. Thanks to a great deal of reactionary nonsense over Kolpak players, It's done in some way to do with whether or not said player qualifies or intends to qualify for England representation.

Take Iain O'Brien for example, who - having lived here for several years and is married to an English woman - was recently stopped from playing for Middlesex as a domestic player. He commented on his blog that he could have worked as anything from a fireman to a CEO, but the ECB decided couldn't play county cricket, because he was still eligible to play for NZ, and thus not England.
Yeah, various future Aussie internationals (Symonds, Jaques & Harris off the top of my head) have had to give away their "domestic" CC status to remain available for Oz despite being British passport holders.
 

Garson007

State Vice-Captain
An employer can hire whom he wishes, he just can't fire whom he wishes. However it being in the regs... sounds a bit dodge legally.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
We've already got one test nation who can't host home games. Afghanistan makes Pakistan look like the Isle of Wight too.

Also, Paksitan and India on the outers a bit too now with the latter's reluctance to host or even let the players of the former into their country. Hopefully the "sub-continetal bloc" now split assunder.

Anyway, Ireland deserve it the most in terms of results.
If you go buy what people who're actually in meetings say (e.g past officials), it's usually the money block (BCCI, ECB, with CA and CSA joining them sometimes) that's much more important than the supposed 'subcontinental block'.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
If you go buy what people who're actually in meetings say (e.g past officials), it's usually the money block (BCCI, ECB, with CA and CSA joining them sometimes) that's much more important than the supposed 'subcontinental block'.
Not sure I agree. The ECB generally vote against the BCCI as a matter of course. Matter of record that England voted against Bangladesh's elevation to test status & in favour of the "postponed" test championship, for instance.

& it's "bloc" not "block", btw. Cold war thing.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Not sure I agree. The ECB generally vote against the BCCI as a matter of course. Matter of record that England voted against Bangladesh's elevation to test status & in favour of the "postponed" test championship, for instance.

& it's "bloc" not "block", btw. Cold war thing.
Bangladesh is one decision. And BCCI and ECB both were against the Test championship due to $$ issues.
 

turnstyle

State 12th Man
Voted for none. I don't see Ireland getting test status any time soon - which is a good thing. What i'd love to see is just more games, whether it be t20, 50 or or 4 day matches against the other 10 during their respective off seasons. Looking at the result over in Dubai the other day, you have to wonder how much of a hit most of the top order have had outside of a few training camps over the past 4-5 months.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Bangladesh is one decision. And BCCI and ECB both were against the Test championship due to $$ issues.
No, it was an ESPN-rights thing, wasn't it? They'd paid $Xm for the exclusive rights until 2015 and the Champions Trophy was a bigger sell for them than the championship.

The head of the MCC called it "a setback for Test cricket, at a time when we need to work to find the optimum balance between all formats of the game." Acoording to cricinfo.

The MCC isn't the ECB, obvz, but the Venn diagrams overlap a fair bit. Reasonable then to assume the ECB wasn't in favour.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
It won't happen for 20 years at least, and when it does happen, it'll be China.
Just what we need, another country with a billion plus people in it and a rapidly developing economy. All they'll need is five minutes' success and won't they be a pleasant pack of fans to deal with?
 

Top