BCCI says 'no' to World Test Championship
India says NO.
India says NO.
Because this '9-3' thing is dependent on Ireland and Afghanistan being admitted to the ranks.What's that got to do with Ireland and Afghanistan's test status?
No, quite the reverse - I've long since believed the Irish should gain test status. How did you arrive at that conclusion?S Kennedy is that cause you want Irish to play for England?
I do not agree with the Irish playing for England. I think they should play for Ireland. I think Ireland and Afghanistan should gain test status but that test championship sounded like something written on a beer mat.No It was a wise crack,sorry.
Some English fans believe they train the Irish from their youths,then they should commit themselves to England,if they want to play test cricket.
I'd say this 9/3 thing is now dead in the water,and Ireland will go backwards afterwards,no young Irish coming through in the counties,bar a few.
It's not form based. Bangladesh have gone from atrocious to atrocious with an occasional win. They're no further along than they were when they were given test status. You don't say "Oh they won one test, they must be the requisite standard now". It's bull ****. They beat Australia in an ODI in 2005. WTF have they done since of any note in that format? Bugger all, aside from beat up on the ****test other teams around occasionally. Zimbabwe is a basket case. Has been since the early-mid 2000s.I do not think they should get rid of anyone based on form. If we are going off 'form' Sri Lanka thumped Australia 3-0, and Bangladesh drew with England 1-1 (and could have won 2-0 in all honesty). Should we demote Australia and England? Pakistan have thumped everybody at 'home'. Besides, all sides are allowed a period of overwhelming ******ness. Heck, England certainly would have had their test status stripped in the 1990s if we are seriously discussing demoting teams on form with any kind of honesty!!
Give Ireland and Afghanistan their (due) test status. Ireland, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe playing against each other regularly.
You think so? They plummeted to bottom of the rankings in 1999, I think having been beaten by the Black Caps!!Also a stretch likening England's run in the 90s with BD and Zimbos. Eng just ran into an ATG Aus team but still managed to pick up wins, produce some fine players and compete with other sides internationally. If BD and Zimbos achieved as much at any point in their history I'd be encouraged to persist with them. Atm they are barely decent at LO cricket. I think its fair to restrict them to that even though in the shorter formats they are barely marketable. If they are to be scheduled tests I'd block them all in as home games but allow BD excursions into the SC. At least they are competitive there.
No it's certainly not their job to promote cricket in other countries. What they are getting criticism for though is their actions that prevents other teams to develop cricket in their regions.I think we need to stop expecting the BCCI, ECB and CA to protect cricket in all the other countries, and instead start expecting these country's boards to protect themselves.
If the cricket board of a country can sell the sport to it's own people then they should be blamed for that, not the Big 3.