Off-topic The Bay 13 Cricket thread - On the Windies bandwagon with Plugger. F*** India

Which Hogwarts house does Joe Root belong in?


  • Total voters
    176

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Posted this on the cricket board, considering the way the WC is going and the barriers towards Ireland in particular getting test status, thought it's a worthwhile discussion. Thoughts?

Since the 'big 3' took control and votes don't matter, surely it makes perfect sense for them to give Ireland test status (even if it'd stop England from stealing all their players), and hopefully due to their rate of improvement, Afghanistan too.

There's not a whole lot to be lost, none of the big nations want to really play Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, and the Windies are sadly an embarrassment. An expansion of the test arena is actually in the interests of the bigger test sides, it provides a pathway for improvement into the test arena for deserving nations, and it doesn't screw Zimbabwe and Bangladesh any worse than they're getting screwed now.

Additionally, if we go with the assumption that West Indian cricket is dying, then perhaps the only way to turn it around is to shock them into action on the test and tours front. Take away guaranteed tours against the stronger nations and the board will be forced to get their act together, take away the those tours and the players won't get the same exposure for the domestic T20 competitions and the contracts they bring. It forces both sides there to get their act together and make sure that the results matter, if that doesn't work, well the belief is they were doomed anyway.

Back to the '4 minnows' in this scenario, the more competition those teams get, the more scope for improvement, and they don't have to play all the bigger fish either until their overall results demand it. Ireland are a more commercially attractive opponent for both England and Australia, Zimbabwe are for South Africa, Bangladesh for India and Sri Lanka, and Afghanistan might just be the only team prepared to tour Pakistan. If the results of one start to back it up, they become a more attractive test opponent overall, otherwise they can play amongst themselves for the most part, with the occassional tour against the better sides to test their progress.

Obviously this is a broad suggestion that would need some fine tuning, but it's a tiered test system, without rigid tiers with ultra-exclusivity, and it provides the opportunity for associates to advance into the test arena, without diluting the competition in the test arena too much (and compromising the big 3's pursuit of $$$, which no plan could get off the ground without considering). It's at least democratic enough to let the results be one of the major factors in who teams play.

An example of a structure with a 7-5 split would look something like this. Big 7- Aus, Eng, Ind, SA, NZ, SL, Pak. Small 5- WI, Zim, Bang, Ire, Afg.

The big 7 are obliged to play 8 tours (similar to the current setup), 6 against the 'big' nations, and 2 against the 'small'. The small 5 get 4 against each other, then a varying level from the top 7 depending on where they sit now, with the Windies still retaining an 8 opponent schedule.

The small 5 opponent break down may look vaguely like this:
Windies- Aus, Eng, Ind, SA
Zimbabwe- SA, NZ, Pakistan
Bangladesh- Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan
Ireland- Eng, Aus
Afghanistan- Pak, SL

Progression from outside the 12 can be based on the less successful of the small 5 playing occassional first class matches against those next in line. Progression from the small to the big would be more difficult as it would require beating one or more 'big' opponents, in more than a once-off situation, but it's a possibility, and the structure is flexible enough to accomodate both the progression from associate upwards, and from 'little 5' upwards.
 
Posted this on the cricket board, considering the way the WC is going and the barriers towards Ireland in particular getting test status, thought it's a worthwhile discussion. Thoughts?

Since the 'big 3' took control and votes don't matter, surely it makes perfect sense for them to give Ireland test status (even if it'd stop England from stealing all their players), and hopefully due to their rate of improvement, Afghanistan too.

There's not a whole lot to be lost, none of the big nations want to really play Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, and the Windies are sadly an embarrassment. An expansion of the test arena is actually in the interests of the bigger test sides, it provides a pathway for improvement into the test arena for deserving nations, and it doesn't screw Zimbabwe and Bangladesh any worse than they're getting screwed now.

Additionally, if we go with the assumption that West Indian cricket is dying, then perhaps the only way to turn it around is to shock them into action on the test and tours front. Take away guaranteed tours against the stronger nations and the board will be forced to get their act together, take away the those tours and the players won't get the same exposure for the domestic T20 competitions and the contracts they bring. It forces both sides there to get their act together and make sure that the results matter, if that doesn't work, well the belief is they were doomed anyway.

Back to the '4 minnows' in this scenario, the more competition those teams get, the more scope for improvement, and they don't have to play all the bigger fish either until their overall results demand it. Ireland are a more commercially attractive opponent for both England and Australia, Zimbabwe are for South Africa, Bangladesh for India and Sri Lanka, and Afghanistan might just be the only team prepared to tour Pakistan. If the results of one start to back it up, they become a more attractive test opponent overall, otherwise they can play amongst themselves for the most part, with the occassional tour against the better sides to test their progress.

Obviously this is a broad suggestion that would need some fine tuning, but it's a tiered test system, without rigid tiers with ultra-exclusivity, and it provides the opportunity for associates to advance into the test arena, without diluting the competition in the test arena too much (and compromising the big 3's pursuit of $$$, which no plan could get off the ground without considering). It's at least democratic enough to let the results be one of the major factors in who teams play.

An example of a structure with a 7-5 split would look something like this. Big 7- Aus, Eng, Ind, SA, NZ, SL, Pak. Small 5- WI, Zim, Bang, Ire, Afg.

The big 7 are obliged to play 8 tours (similar to the current setup), 6 against the 'big' nations, and 2 against the 'small'. The small 5 get 4 against each other, then a varying level from the top 7 depending on where they sit now, with the Windies still retaining an 8 opponent schedule.

The small 5 opponent break down may look vaguely like this:
Windies- Aus, Eng, Ind, SA
Zimbabwe- SA, NZ, Pakistan
Bangladesh- Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan
Ireland- Eng, Aus
Afghanistan- Pak, SL

Progression from outside the 12 can be based on the less successful of the small 5 playing occassional first class matches against those next in line. Progression from the small to the big would be more difficult as it would require beating one or more 'big' opponents, in more than a once-off situation, but it's a possibility, and the structure is flexible enough to accomodate both the progression from associate upwards, and from 'little 5' upwards.
It's a complex matter and your post has great points, there were some suggestions of a two tier system with Ireland, zimbo's etc.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It's a complex matter and your post has great points, there were some suggestions of a two tier system with Ireland, zimbo's etc.

I think the idea of a tier system scares people too much, everyone who's not a powerhouse (like Aus, Eng, Ind, SA are) thinks they might be relegated and never get desirable opponents again, nor ever get back into the top tier. I think that's why the flexible structure works, even if you get 'relegated', you still get to play some top opponents, just not as many, and moving back up is based on merit as opposed to convenience. The top tier can always expand depending on how many teams warrant more permanent upgrades, and no one gets banished from it without their results falling off a cliff.
 
Anyone know what happens if a match is cancelled? Is it rescheduled, or are the points split? There will be zero cricket on Saturday.

I think some games have a 'reserve day', not sure if that's the case in the group stages though, points split seems likely.
 
I think some games have a 'reserve day', not sure if that's the case in the group stages though, points split seems likely.

Not so bad I guess if the point split happens. It's only Bangladesh. :$
 
Not so bad I guess if the point split happens. It's only Bangladesh. :$

It is bad though, we sacrificed a point and gave them a free one. Would much rather split a result with the Kiwis or Sri Lankans.
 
Is it the top four teams that go through?

Yep, so we're still a few upsets from danger, but you don't want to be splitting points with a minnow, because you never know who might f*** up against them.

That said, this is more a concern in the other group for the Windies and Pakis with both Ireland and Zimbabwe breathing down their necks like Bombers.
 
Yep, so we're still a few upsets from danger, but you don't want to be splitting points with a minnow, because you never know who might f*** up against them.

That said, this is more a concern in the other group for the Windies and Pakis with both Ireland and Zimbabwe thereabouts.

Yeah fair points I spose'.

Damn. Looks like I will have to take a trip to my olds place and use their bandwidth to watch some decent games online. Maybe the NZ/ENG one.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Yep, so we're still a few upsets from danger, but you don't want to be splitting points with a minnow, because you never know who might f*** up against them.

That said, this is more a concern in the other group for the Windies and Pakis with both Ireland and Zimbabwe breathing down their necks like ASADA*.
 
I'd give the West Indies a 5 year threat ie. get the friggin' house in order or lose Test Status

Too harsh, IMO. If you do that, they'll never get it back.

Test cricket is too small a club as it is, and Bangladesh get even more of a free ride than the Windies on the back of nothing. Let them keep their test status, just let more countries in to keep them honest. Then we don't have to waste our time playing these sides that don't give enough of a crap about their performance, instead maybe we'll find someone else who does.
 
We could've played Bangladesh and Afghanistan on the same day in Perth FFS...

Good one QLD and your shit weather :thumbsdown:

They need to build a roof at the Gabba, the amount of washouts they get there is ridiculous.

Sydney isn't much better.

I can't remember the last washout in Perth, we might have a shit stadium but at least it doesn't rain here.
 
They need to build a roof at the Gabba, the amount of washouts they get there is ridiculous.

Sydney isn't much better.

I can't remember the last washout in Perth, we might have a shit stadium but at least it doesn't rain here.
Couldn't agree more Plugg
 
Too harsh, IMO. If you do that, they'll never get it back.

Test cricket is too small a club as it is, and Bangladesh get even more of a free ride than the Windies on the back of nothing. Let them keep their test status, just let more countries in to keep them honest. Then we don't have to waste our time playing these sides that don't give enough of a crap about their performance, instead maybe we'll find someone else who does.
You are right I just want a fire lit under their ass... hey it could just be an empty threat to get em' twitchy ;)
 
It is bad though, we sacrificed a point and gave them a free one. Would much rather split a result with the Kiwis or Sri Lankans.
It screws England though and that can only be a good thing. Bangladesh could actually sneak past them into the quarters
 
Posted this on the cricket board, considering the way the WC is going and the barriers towards Ireland in particular getting test status, thought it's a worthwhile discussion. Thoughts?

Since the 'big 3' took control and votes don't matter, surely it makes perfect sense for them to give Ireland test status (even if it'd stop England from stealing all their players), and hopefully due to their rate of improvement, Afghanistan too.
It depends on the structure underneath the national team. 10 years ago everyone thought Kenya were going to be the next test nation. The reality was their talent pool was really only 30-40 club cricketers in one city that just happened to have 3 or 4 absolute quality. Once they fell away cricket went nowhere in Kenya

If they have a decent structure underneath then definitely they should have a chance. The problem with Afghanistan is that they are never going to get to play international cricket in their own country. I think Pakistan will eventually get some games back, but no one will ever go to Afghanistan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top