Do you think we will have a new 'major cricket country' anytime soon?

[Dazinho]

Evening, it was just one I've pondered for a while.

Some people like the idea of the game becoming more global, others see no reason why that's absolutely necessary.

I've never quite squared that one, I think it's really on an emerging nation to put their hand up and demonstrate that it would be stupid to exclude them.

There was the lost shot with Kenya, Zimbabwe were a mid-ranking test team before politics got involved. The story of Afghan cricket was wonderful but appears to have plateaued or even regressed. Ireland had a golden generation due to the England county system that getting test cricket means it can not rely upon nearly as much.

Scotland and the Dutch seem to have been at around the same level forever.

Nepal are showing upward trajectory but let's see where that elevator gets off - and is the flash in the pan with Italy likely to be another Ireland situation with a collection of naturalised and heritage players? Could say the same for Namibia, potentially.

I don't see it being a European nation, North America could be a good place to look. I'm surprised the game isn't bigger in Canada, for whatever reason.

Do you think we'll ever see a new nation get up to not just test status, but really make a mark there?

Would it matter if this was it and we had a kind of 'two tier' test match situation with maybe the existing ODI crowd joining at some point in the future?

Thoughts appreciated as ever - thanks...

 

[TheJediBrah]

Nah if anything international cricket will slowly die. We're going to lose more high level teams we already have than gain new ones

 

[Ali TT]

I kinda feel cricket is going in the opposite direction - like a reverse trajectory to international basketball towards total Indian hegemony in the pre-eminent format (T20). "New" nations may emerge in that format but only to jostle among the second tier nations behind India, with their stars shining in the IPL alongside those of the traditional cricket nations.

Tests may be more balanced, as the Indian players of the future may be more biased towards T20 than those in other countries, but it'll only be among the nations who already play it, and even then the top 5-6. It will be a diminished format compared to now.

 

[shortpitched713]

I'm not so doom and gloom on the future trajectory of Test cricket. It will become fashionable again. New countries will definitely discover and be part of it's revival.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Namibia!

 

[DrWolverine]

Yes. As T20 cricket gets more important, we may see someone from an “unknown” country become a star in T20 franchise(mostly IPL) and he will inspire others.

 

[Cacofonix the Bard]

Nepal probably the one where it's best poised to become mainstream?

 

[Silver Silva]

Evening, it was just one I've pondered for a while.

Some people like the idea of the game becoming more global, others see no reason why that's absolutely necessary.

I've never quite squared that one, I think it's really on an emerging nation to put their hand up and demonstrate that it would be stupid to exclude them.

There was the lost shot with Kenya, Zimbabwe were a mid-ranking test team before politics got involved. The story of Afghan cricket was wonderful but appears to have plateaued or even regressed. Ireland had a golden generation due to the England county system that getting test cricket means it can not rely upon nearly as much.

Scotland and the Dutch seem to have been at around the same level forever.

Nepal are showing upward trajectory but let's see where that elevator gets off - and is the flash in the pan with Italy likely to be another Ireland situation with a collection of naturalised and heritage players? Could say the same for Namibia, potentially.

I don't see it being a European nation, North America could be a good place to look. I'm surprised the game isn't bigger in Canada, for whatever reason.

Do you think we'll ever see a new nation get up to not just test status, but really make a mark there?

Would it matter if this was it and we had a kind of 'two tier' test match situation with maybe the existing ODI crowd joining at some point in the future?

Thoughts appreciated as ever - thanks...

If a side can produce majority of players from its own country , have the ability to build stadiums, have great fan attendance, then I think that is grounds for Test Status .

Nepal seems to tick all those boxes.

 

[LangleyburyCCPlayer]

Nepal probably the one where it's best poised to become mainstream?

I think cricket is already very mainstream there, but as a poor, not particularly big country where cricket is still developing, there’s a difference between that and having a consistently good team. I think it’s harsh to say that Afghanistan are plateauing or even regressing in white ball cricket, but for various reasons they play very few Tests. The USA have come on a lot in recent times, even if cricket just gets a little bit more popular there, there is a lot of potential

 

[Molehill]

I think cricket is already very mainstream there, but as a poor, not particularly big country where cricket is still developing, there’s a difference between that and having a consistently good team. I think it’s harsh to say that Afghanistan are plateauing or even regressing in white ball cricket, but for various reasons they play very few Tests. The USA have come on a lot in recent times, even if cricket just gets a little bit more popular there, there is a lot of potential

The USA was the one I was thinking of too. I remember going on a works trip and being able to chat cricket with a lady from Dallas (obviously of Indian descent). If they just tap into that massive community more, then cricket could really grow there.

 

[Kenneth Viljoen]

The USA was the one I was thinking of too. I remember going on a works trip and being able to chat cricket with a lady from Dallas (obviously of Indian descent). If they just tap into that massive community more, then cricket could really grow there.

The US cricket board filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy last year October , they are miles away from Test status.

They also have failed to demonstrate they can produce their own players of a high quality.

USA Cricket Files for Chapter 11 as Next Step in Organizational Restructure - USA Cricket

usacricket.org

 

[andruid]

T20 might make cricket more football-like, in which the big leagues become a means for cricketers from all parts to become superstars and make a living, and from tehse leagues national teams will slect their squads.

 

[Chin Music]

Hard to see how any country can ever develop the infrastructure to become that big given that it is three boards who have the overwhelming share of the financial cake.

 

[GotSpin]

Hard to see how any country can ever develop the infrastructure to become that big given that it is three boards who have the overwhelming share of the financial cake.

The idea that Australia and England should be funding the game in other countries or shouldn’t be trying to make as much as money as they can is absurd. It’s a constant battle for survival

 

[Jane Austen]

The idea that Australia and England should be funding the game in other countries or shouldn’t be trying to make as much as money as they can is absurd. It’s a constant battle for survival

But this attitude by India,Australia and England is a short-sighted and self-serving strategy especially in that none of "The Big Three" ARE battling for survival.ICC needs to be firm and authorative----an oxymoron I know----and should distribute funds much more benificially to the other Test-playing nations. The more competion that ensues,the more excitement and interest,which,in turn will generate more money for all.
If a more benevolent attitude is not taken by the richer Test-playing nations,and very soon,international cricket will be seen as no more than an ancient post-colonial relic brought out for traditional purposes but with no real purpose.Franchise cricket,notably T20,will dominate.
But if this is what cricket's many millions of fans actually want then so be it but be careful what you wish for!
Cricket is moving towards the precipice in its greedy search for gold-----and we know what happened to Midas!

 

[Chin Music]

But this attitude by India,Australia and England is a short-sighted strategy especially in that none of "The Big Three" ARE battling for survival.ICC needs to be firm and authorative----an oxymoron I know----and should distribute funds much more benificially to the other Test-playing nations. The more competion that ensues,the more excitement and interest,which,in turn will generate more money for all.
If a more benevolent attitude is not taken by the richer Test-playing nations,and very soon,international cricket will be seen as no more than an ancient post-colonial relic brought out for traditional purposes but with no real purpose.Franchise cricket,notably T20,will dominate.
But if this is what cricket's many millions of fans actually want then so be it but be careful what you wish for!
Cricket is moving towards the precipice in its greedy search for gold-----and we know what happened to Midas!

When I laid out my previous post, I did so because I am rather pessimistic in seeing an international cricket that is much beyond t20 with a few tests here and there. We have seen the rapid decline of test cricket across Sri Lanka and Pakistan in the last few years, with the continued bottom dwelling of the West Indies, who now can barely perform in 50 over cricket. We have seen a bit of a revival of South Africa and New Zealand continue to produce a reasonable team in the longest form of the game, but it is hard to look at the overall trend of the last few years and not be worried about its sustainability. Up to a point, you can argue that the IPL franchise owners are ensuring that certain countries have a lucrative enough t20 franchise league, but of course they are not doing it out of their own largesse, nor am I suggesting they should.

I also felt pretty folorn about the England team's performances over the last year and think that there isn't much sustainable about our own test cricket if we come up with some of the dross that we have produced in the last couple of years.

 

[GotSpin]

But this attitude by India,Australia and England is a short-sighted and self-serving strategy especially in that none of "The Big Three" ARE battling for survival.ICC needs to be firm and authorative----an oxymoron I know----and should distribute funds much more benificially to the other Test-playing nations. The more competion that ensues,the more excitement and interest,which,in turn will generate more money for all.
If a more benevolent attitude is not taken by the richer Test-playing nations,and very soon,international cricket will be seen as no more than an ancient post-colonial relic brought out for traditional purposes but with no real purpose.Franchise cricket,notably T20,will dominate.
But if this is what cricket's many millions of fans actually want then so be it but be careful what you wish for!
Cricket is moving towards the precipice in its greedy search for gold-----and we know what happened to Midas!

I specifically mentioned Australia and England though…it’s not for those two countries to fund other boards. England probably already does enough simply by the amount of international cricket they play

 

[Ali TT]

The only country who could theoretically sustain a national side and domestic structure that can compete alongside India over the long term needs a lot of things outside of cricket to change for the better. And none of that is happening any time soon and even if it did it'd probably take 20-30 years.

 

[Dazinho]

The only country who could theoretically sustain a national side and domestic structure that can compete alongside India over the long term needs a lot of things outside of cricket to change for the better. And none of that is happening any time soon and even if it did it'd probably take 20-30 years.

I've narrowed it down to one of China or America? As I said in the OP I'm surprised that Canada have never at least had a Kenya-style period of being surprisingly good. They've had sustained periods of being 'almost top tier' at Rugby Union, most notably when they got to the knockout stages of one of the World Cups in the 90s (think it was 1991).
If there was a country I would have expected to threaten test status and didn't it would be Canada.
America is a big enough country to get good at a sport fairly quickly as they have shown with football (or soccer as they call it). If interest picked up then they'd be decent within 10-15 years I reckon.

 

[GotSpin]

I've narrowed it down to one of China or America? As I said in the OP I'm surprised that Canada have never at least had a Kenya-style period of being surprisingly good. They've had sustained periods of being 'almost top tier' at Rugby Union, most notably when they got to the knockout stages of one of the World Cups in the 90s (think it was 1991).
If there was a country I would have expected to threaten test status and didn't it would be Canada.
America is a big enough country to get good at a sport fairly quickly as they have shown with football (or soccer as they call it). If interest picked up then they'd be decent within 10-15 years I reckon.

Didn't the government body in Canada get done for corruption recently. Might be an answer there