zimcricketforums.com

What makes this discussion so difficult is the fact that mixed up in it are two very different aspects of the sport we all love: the actual cricket and money, test cricket and full member status.

I doubt it very much that any associate nation nowadays really wants to play test cricket for the sake of it (some players might want to play it, but that's a different story). But to join the full member have-nots at the table where they feast on the bigwigs' left-overs you need to strive for full member status = test cricket. What Ireland, imho, really want is a good number of ODIs and T20Is per summer against big teams, an almost guaranteed entry into the world cups, and a larger piece of the cake. If they have to play the odd home test and run a FC competition to achieve these goals they will eventually do it (yes, I know, they haven't moved towards a FC competition as yet ... that is precisely because they will only do it if they have to, preferably at the last moment). ZC's position is not much different from that: They agree to the odd test because it's something they have to do once in a blue moon, and the Logan Cup is treated like a nuisance rather than the cradle of our future test cricketers.

Some of the privileges of the elite club, such as automatic entry into world cups for all full members, have already been eroded. It will be interesting to see what the future brings. What makes Afghanistan's case different from that of Ireland and Kenya previously is the fact that due to their geographical/cultural proximity to a number of full members they are getting a lot more exposure already. The country has also gone seriously cricket-mad which opens up infinitely larger economical possibilities, no matter the state of their economy (you can bet that more ex-pat Afghans are following their ODIs than Irishmen in Ireland and around the globe follow theirs). Afghanistan could easily become a "full member" of the Middle Eastern/subcontinental ODI/T20I circuit, even without test cricket. A lot depends upon whether Afghanistan can further strengthen their limited overs "brand" to a point where Pak, BD, SL, maybe even India will play them regularly because their audiences want to these matches, and whether those cricket boards embrace the Afghan challenge/opportunity or cast them aside. The ICC can play a role ... I'm not sure which it will be.

foreignfield wrote:What makes this discussion so difficult is the fact that mixed up in it are two very different aspects of the sport we all love: the actual cricket and money, test cricket and full member status.

I doubt it very much that any associate nation nowadays really wants to play test cricket for the sake of it (some players might want to play it, but that's a different story). But to join the full member have-nots at the table where they feast on the bigwigs' left-overs you need to strive for full member status = test cricket. What Ireland, imho, really want is a good number of ODIs and T20Is per summer against big teams, an almost guaranteed entry into the world cups, and a larger piece of the cake. If they have to play the odd home test and run a FC competition to achieve these goals they will eventually do it (yes, I know, they haven't moved towards a FC competition as yet ... that is precisely because they will only do it if they have to, preferably at the last moment). ZC's position is not much different from that: They agree to the odd test because it's something they have to do once in a blue moon, and the Logan Cup is treated like a nuisance rather than the cradle of our future test cricketers.

Some of the privileges of the elite club, such as automatic entry into world cups for all full members, have already been eroded. It will be interesting to see what the future brings. What makes Afghanistan's case different from that of Ireland and Kenya previously is the fact that due to their geographical/cultural proximity to a number of full members they are getting a lot more exposure already. The country has also gone seriously cricket-mad which opens up infinitely larger economical possibilities, no matter the state of their economy (you can bet that more ex-pat Afghans are following their ODIs than Irishmen in Ireland and around the globe follow theirs). Afghanistan could easily become a "full member" of the Middle Eastern/subcontinental ODI/T20I circuit, even without test cricket. A lot depends upon whether Afghanistan can further strengthen their limited overs "brand" to a point where Pak, BD, SL, maybe even India will play them regularly because their audiences want to these matches, and whether those cricket boards embrace the Afghan challenge/opportunity or cast them aside. The ICC can play a role ... I'm not sure which it will be.

Well articulated. Very few posts on this topic have made more sense than this one.

foreignfield wrote:What makes this discussion so difficult is the fact that mixed up in it are two very different aspects of the sport we all love: the actual cricket and money, test cricket and full member status.

I doubt it very much that any associate nation nowadays really wants to play test cricket for the sake of it (some players might want to play it, but that's a different story). But to join the full member have-nots at the table where they feast on the bigwigs' left-overs you need to strive for full member status = test cricket. What Ireland, imho, really want is a good number of ODIs and T20Is per summer against big teams, an almost guaranteed entry into the world cups, and a larger piece of the cake. If they have to play the odd home test and run a FC competition to achieve these goals they will eventually do it (yes, I know, they haven't moved towards a FC competition as yet ... that is precisely because they will only do it if they have to, preferably at the last moment). ZC's position is not much different from that: They agree to the odd test because it's something they have to do once in a blue moon, and the Logan Cup is treated like a nuisance rather than the cradle of our future test cricketers.

Some of the privileges of the elite club, such as automatic entry into world cups for all full members, have already been eroded. It will be interesting to see what the future brings. What makes Afghanistan's case different from that of Ireland and Kenya previously is the fact that due to their geographical/cultural proximity to a number of full members they are getting a lot more exposure already. The country has also gone seriously cricket-mad which opens up infinitely larger economical possibilities, no matter the state of their economy (you can bet that more ex-pat Afghans are following their ODIs than Irishmen in Ireland and around the globe follow theirs). Afghanistan could easily become a "full member" of the Middle Eastern/subcontinental ODI/T20I circuit, even without test cricket. A lot depends upon whether Afghanistan can further strengthen their limited overs "brand" to a point where Pak, BD, SL, maybe even India will play them regularly because their audiences want to these matches, and whether those cricket boards embrace the Afghan challenge/opportunity or cast them aside. The ICC can play a role ... I'm not sure which it will be.

Well said and as CrimsonAvenger said, quite sensibly written.

With regards to the Irish moving towards a FC competition, in fact they have been doing so with their 3-day interprovincial tournament for the past few seasons. My consistent complaint though is that the Irish could have done this sooner (from 2008 or before) by cutting the bloated club competition schedules. But they are moving in the right direction which is, in my humble opinion, to be commended and is good for the game.