-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Round 21
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round 20 Winner: Bearfly
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
The Associates thread
- Thread starter The Speaker
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Makes no real difference. All being a Full Member really means now is that you get a guaranteed seat at the table while India, Australia and England dictate your future to you.
- Dec 18, 2007
- 11,044
- 6,872
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Non that play Essendon
I would just give all the associates full test and OD status, the rankings can be used to determine who plays who in test cricket so the likes of Australia, India, South Africa could continue to only play the top nations whilst the newer teams play test and OD cricket against other teams of their level.
The rankings then would determine who played the world cup, allowing it too be reduced to ten teams, this would overcome the Ireland situation.
The rankings then would determine who played the world cup, allowing it too be reduced to ten teams, this would overcome the Ireland situation.
RW
Cancelled
10k Posts
Sydney Forum Service Medal
Sydney Swans - Jake Lloyd 2020 Player Sponsor
BeanCoiNFT Investor
Sydney Swans - Harry Cunningham 2019 Player Sponsor
Ex-Moderator
Sydney Swans - Gary Rohan Player Sponsor 2018
Sydney Swans - George Hewett Player Sponsor 2017
Sydney Swans - Callum Mills Player Sponsor 2016
Podcaster
- Jan 11, 2003
- 16,283
- 19,093
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Not really sure where to put this but this is a brilliant piece of cricket writing by Jarrod Kimber about one of the so-called 'minnows' of this World Cup. Just read it!
http://www.espncricinfo.com//icc-cricket-world-cup-2015/content/story/840987.html
http://www.espncricinfo.com//icc-cricket-world-cup-2015/content/story/840987.html
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,347
Good article.
Sums it up in five words - Associates aren't allowed bad days.
The reaction from people as soon as they have one bad performance is completely over the top.
Sums it up in five words - Associates aren't allowed bad days.
The reaction from people as soon as they have one bad performance is completely over the top.
- Thread starter
- #257
Tim Wigmore on the work the ICC (as in, not the big administrators) has done with Associates to prepare them for this WC:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/850235.html
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/850235.html
The_Reaper
Hall of Famer
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,347
It's interesting that very few (i haven't seen any?) have come out in support of the reduction of teams for the next world cup. But I've seen some of the biggest names in the sport (S Waugh, Warne, Tendulkar, Dravid) come out and criticize the decision.
That article is quite correct in that it's not so much the ICC that is doing it. They are simply strangled by the big three, and in particular the big one.
That article is quite correct in that it's not so much the ICC that is doing it. They are simply strangled by the big three, and in particular the big one.
- Thread starter
- #260
Aakash Chopra has supported it, but thinks the lack of development for other nations is wrong. http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/843001.html
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,347
He makes good some points, particularly about the amount of automatic qualifiers. But the whole purpose of the next world cup - the less teams, the additional games, the top eight qualifying is all designed around maximising the commercial exposure that comes with India. Nothing more, nothing less.
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,347
A few things I was thinking the other day that could really help development of associate teams - not that the full members, particularly India, England or Australia would give a shit.
Tours
Each top 6 associate nation should tour one of the 10 full member nations at least once a year for two weeks. Given there are 6 associates, and 10 full members, the full members wouldn't even have to commit to a tour every year. In a 4-year period, there would be 24 tours, which would mean 4 full members host associates in three of the four years, and the other 6 full members nations would host associates in two of the four years. Surely that is hardly an imposition on a full member nation. In the two week tour they could play 3 ODI's and 1 FC game. FC game could even be against a state team, rather than against the national team.
In the context of Australia this would be perfect to host around about September each year, giving our players a few warm up matches leading into the season proper. There is no point playing these games at international venues, so this would also be a perfect opportunity to take some international cricket to places that rarely get it - Manuka, Newcastle, Bendigo/Ballarat etc,. At the same time this would be invaluable regular experience for an associate team, who at the moment just fight for the occasional dregs i.e. sometimes Ireland get a one-off ODI during Ashes tours. Don't think they even got that in 2013...
The top 6 associate nations would be re-ranked at the end of each year based upon their ODI performance in the 12 months prior, and those top 6 nations would get tours.
Temporary Test Status
This should be in place for teams that are clearly performing above their level of associate, but they don't quite have the systems in place to become permanent test members. At the moment test status is basically "all or nothing" and I think that barrier is just a bit too high, and in a lot of case stunts the development because they can't quite get over that barrier to get themselves regular international cricket.
But for associates that are performing really well (Ireland now, Kenya 10 years ago, Netherlands probably been on the brink of this level a couple of times) they could be awarded test status for two years with a review of their performances at the end of those two years. They may be awarded full status if their performances warrant, and their second tier structure is adequate. They might continue for another two years with temporary test status if they performed decently but their second tier structure was still not suitable. If they got dominated, then they would be demoted and head back to the drawing board, but at least with a taste of what it takes to be a test nation and an idea of where they are lacking.
Feeder System
Not quite the right word and this is a bit of a long shot but basically pairing up associate nations with a state board. Maybe even multiple associate nations with a state board. So say Afghanistan and Netherlands with New South Wales Cricket Associate. NSWCA would bring out a couple of their younger internationals (u/25's) for 12 months and those guys would live here, work here and play grade cricket. Unless these guys have scored a county gig, then this would easily be the strongest and most consistent form of cricket they've been exposed to which would do their game a world of good. The costs shouldn't be too high for state boards either - flights and administration costs to find them a job and a place to live should be it. Maybe some cricket gear as well. They'd be working here so you're not paying them. They'd pay their rent out of their wages, or they could even billet with someone in their grade club. Understandably not every state cricket board would be in a position to do such a thing. There is also a definite issue of VISA-skipping as has happened with athletes from third world countries plenty of times before.
These three things would significantly advance the development of associate nations, but it also pretends that people in the right positions even want to do such a thing. So in it's essence its pretty much a waste of time, which is quite disappointing.
Tours
Each top 6 associate nation should tour one of the 10 full member nations at least once a year for two weeks. Given there are 6 associates, and 10 full members, the full members wouldn't even have to commit to a tour every year. In a 4-year period, there would be 24 tours, which would mean 4 full members host associates in three of the four years, and the other 6 full members nations would host associates in two of the four years. Surely that is hardly an imposition on a full member nation. In the two week tour they could play 3 ODI's and 1 FC game. FC game could even be against a state team, rather than against the national team.
In the context of Australia this would be perfect to host around about September each year, giving our players a few warm up matches leading into the season proper. There is no point playing these games at international venues, so this would also be a perfect opportunity to take some international cricket to places that rarely get it - Manuka, Newcastle, Bendigo/Ballarat etc,. At the same time this would be invaluable regular experience for an associate team, who at the moment just fight for the occasional dregs i.e. sometimes Ireland get a one-off ODI during Ashes tours. Don't think they even got that in 2013...
The top 6 associate nations would be re-ranked at the end of each year based upon their ODI performance in the 12 months prior, and those top 6 nations would get tours.
Temporary Test Status
This should be in place for teams that are clearly performing above their level of associate, but they don't quite have the systems in place to become permanent test members. At the moment test status is basically "all or nothing" and I think that barrier is just a bit too high, and in a lot of case stunts the development because they can't quite get over that barrier to get themselves regular international cricket.
But for associates that are performing really well (Ireland now, Kenya 10 years ago, Netherlands probably been on the brink of this level a couple of times) they could be awarded test status for two years with a review of their performances at the end of those two years. They may be awarded full status if their performances warrant, and their second tier structure is adequate. They might continue for another two years with temporary test status if they performed decently but their second tier structure was still not suitable. If they got dominated, then they would be demoted and head back to the drawing board, but at least with a taste of what it takes to be a test nation and an idea of where they are lacking.
Feeder System
Not quite the right word and this is a bit of a long shot but basically pairing up associate nations with a state board. Maybe even multiple associate nations with a state board. So say Afghanistan and Netherlands with New South Wales Cricket Associate. NSWCA would bring out a couple of their younger internationals (u/25's) for 12 months and those guys would live here, work here and play grade cricket. Unless these guys have scored a county gig, then this would easily be the strongest and most consistent form of cricket they've been exposed to which would do their game a world of good. The costs shouldn't be too high for state boards either - flights and administration costs to find them a job and a place to live should be it. Maybe some cricket gear as well. They'd be working here so you're not paying them. They'd pay their rent out of their wages, or they could even billet with someone in their grade club. Understandably not every state cricket board would be in a position to do such a thing. There is also a definite issue of VISA-skipping as has happened with athletes from third world countries plenty of times before.
These three things would significantly advance the development of associate nations, but it also pretends that people in the right positions even want to do such a thing. So in it's essence its pretty much a waste of time, which is quite disappointing.
I would like to in particular Ireland and Afghanistan the chance to host touring teams prior to test / odi series in place of county/ cricket board 11s in four day cricket. A much more competitive means of preparation for the touring teams and a chance for these two standout associates to test themselves with a view to approving them for test status in the not too distant future.
The_Reaper
Hall of Famer
Afghanistan have no chance of hosting anything.
- Thread starter
- #265
In the UAE?
Should have added this in my post- in the UAE as a precursor to Pakistan series
I'm surprised the UAE don't have full time cricketers given the ICC has headquarters there.
- Thread starter
- #268
Phil Simmons is leaving Ireland for the Windies:
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/mar/18/ireland-coach-phil-simmons-west-indies
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/mar/18/ireland-coach-phil-simmons-west-indies
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Nephew* think ireland need a fresh approach anyway
Haha, shit well there you go. Have thought for the best part of a decade that Lendl was his son.
Bomber Bears
Cancelled
Pakistan based in UAE should give opportunities for touring sides to play the Afghans, UAE, ditto sides touring UK should play Ireland, Scots, Netherlands. More can be done, essentially.
The ICC don't care though
The ICC don't care though
Maybe. But if you are playing England and Ireland, at least in limited over forms which is the warm-up game and which is the harder opposiiton to have a full series against?
- Moderator
- #274
I think Ireland's heading in the right direction with getting sides touring England to come over and play them as well. They just need to go from playing one off matches to best of 3 series, or even try and get England to play a tri-series, possibly alternate between Ireland and Scotland so the Scots don't miss out as well.
- Thread starter
- #275
They don't really have a lot of choice. It's up to the full members as to whether they wish to grace Ireland with their presence.
