Cricket's Associations - how the other sides live...

And more http://www.espncricinfo.com/ireland/content/story/482042.html?CMP=OTC-RSS William Porterfield has said he will consider giving up his role as Ireland captain if handed an opportunity to play Test cricket for England. Porterfield, who recently signed up with Warwickshire, has led Ireland in 21 ODIs since 2008 but his country is not yet a Test-playing nation. Two other Ireland cricketers, Ed Joyce and Eoin Morgan, have gone on to play cricket for England with Morgan now a part of their Test line-up. "It would obviously be a nice situation to be in if you're getting the call," Porterfield told BBC WM. "I'm looking to play Test cricket so I think it's a call you'd be doing well to turn down. "I think it's where every cricketer wants to be, playing Test cricket and playing at the top level, and if that opportunity came along I'd be more than grateful to take that call."

An old article, but still relevant http://wisdencricketer.com/item.php?parent_id=3&child_id=0&item_id=546 "However, the World Cup put Ireland in the global spotlight and, back in Dublin, Irish Cricket Union chief executive Warren Deutrom set about capitalising on this new-found status. Deutrom is a former ICC and ECB executive, attuned to the inner workings of the cricket economy with a contact book to match. He noted a clause in India’s domestic television deal that stipulated 25 matches should be held ‘out of market’, and saw a role for Ireland in hosting potentially lucrative India ODIs in the northern hemisphere. Discussions with Lalit Modi, the Indian board vice president, led to the setting up of the Future Series, a three-game ODI rubber between India and South Africa, with two friendlies against the hosts Ireland. These games took place in June 2007 at Stormont Castle in Belfast but were blighted by poor weather and empty stands; the most memorable moment came when Sachin Tendulkar, wearing four sweaters, was clean bowled by 26-year-old Roger Whelan, who then retired to sing lead vocals with The Stimulants, a thrash-metal band from Dublin. But in London the Future Series was being viewed with something approaching horror by ECB chief executive David Collier. By hosting international cricket on a regular basis Ireland’s growing commercial ambitions would potentially clash with England’s northern hemisphere monopoly, and reduce the value of the ECB’s television rights, for which Sky had paid £220million in 2005. Collier’s initial response was to threaten the ICU with expulsion from the Friends Provident Trophy. The issue was ultimately resolved with a pay-off: the ICU would stop hosting India in return for England visiting for a potential sell-out ODI every other year. In addition, the ECB paid a six-figure sum to take ownership of Ireland’s television rights. There is a double standard here, not lost on cricket followers in Ireland: when the ECB offered to host IPL matches earlier this year, Collier was attempting to do exactly what he stopped Ireland doing."

Looks like the criticism of the exclusion of the associate has found some traction http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc_cricket_worldcup2011/content/current/story/504195.html there will be only 10 teams in the next world cup. however it looks like they may be a qualification series between the 7th to 14th best ODI team to see who will qualify to the World Cup So we may see the likes of Ireland, Canada and Netherlands qualifying to the World cup if they are good enough.

Russ,you are perceptive. I was being kind but then it was depressing to recount the way England and Australia used the ICC for their own benefit when they were powerful. Now we have them muttering under their breath that India is too powerful. We could talk about this during the Live Blog tonight if you come on.

I think that is a very generous interpretation Vinay. England has always toured in their winter, and they included New Zealand in their Australian tours, and hosted every nation regularly. But Australia, not so much. To be fair, until the late 60s travel was generally by boat, and funds were scarce, so Australia toured India and Pakistan (en route to or from England) in 56/57, 59/60, 64/65; much as they also toured the USA in the 1890-1930s. But they weren't generous hosts. They played New Zealand away in one test in 1946, then not again until they toured in 73/74, India didn't follow up their 47/48 tour until 67/68 then not again until 77/78, Pakistan played 1 test in Australia up until 72/73. That is a pretty dismal record against "emerging" nations - particularly when one remembers that one of the main reasons Australia started hosting other tours after 1970 was the unavailability of South Africa.

I haven't missed that point, but I'm trying to be pragmatic about things. The countries that have made it to Test Status are countries in which Cricket is one of the most popular sports. The chance of finding money and support for the game in these countries was never going to be difficult. I'd question the ability to do the same in some of the associate countries. So the question is, do you plug away for years in the hope of turning associate nations into competitive one day outfits and then test playing nations. OR Do you concede that it's nigh on impossible and push Twenty 20 into these countries in the hope of attracting new cricket fans that way? I've had no interest in watching the associate nations play in this World Cup as most of the time it's just a procession for the good teams but in the case of Twenty 20, I'd happily switch on to see how they go. Even though I don't particularly like Twenty 20. To become a Test nation takes a lot of time (even more so to become a competitive one), it needs a production line of players and a country in which the sport is played widely (

mintox,you miss an important point. Twenty20 is less demanding of technique but if this is what you teach them they will never play the long and pure form of the game. Twenty20 is not cricket. It is baseball. You ask Trent Johnston of Ireland and he will tell you he wants to play Test Cricket. I would not ne unhappy if cricket is not played in 200 countries. The subcontinent,Australia,UK.Africa and New Zealand is enough for me. Lets get twenty countries upto speed before we dream of having 50, It is cricket and I do not want to see it cheapened and brought down to the lowest common denominator.

As it stands now, playing the associate nations is the equivalent of what the Asian Football Confederation did by inviting India to the Asian Cup and that whilst it was a good experience for India, they got hammered and won't play another team again before they most probably qualify for the cup again in four years time. It is a joke and shouldn't happen, not the least until the ICC puts in place a plan for the associate nations to play regular matches against the Test Nations. Not only that, but the Test Nations should have to travel to these countries to help develop the game there and so that these small nations aren't bearing the costs of travelling. That is if they continue with One Day cricket! Surely with the advent of Twenty 20 and its popularity, the focus of associate nations should be on this form of the game. Most would say that it requires less technique than other forms which fits perfectly with the associate nations. Games are shorter and easier to sell to countries that don't traditionally take to cricket in big numbers. For me the ICC has missed the boat when it comes to developing test and one day playing countries. The international sports marketplace is saturated with any number of sports and Crickets ability to get a foothold using One Day or Test Cricket is limited. Twenty 20, although it's derided by many including myself, would seem to be International Crickets ticket to including associate nations in the game.

Vinay, Check the article queue. I sent in a summary of my Tigers ...

Ben,Ian,lets look at it from the point of view that progress has been made. At least we have the Associates and the Inter-Continental Cup. Lets selectively encourage those with a cricketing "culture" among these. Looking back Australia actually played 4 Tests against India just after independence in 1947 and England played them in 1952. It is not as if england and australia have been derelict in their responsibilities. Lots to talk about . why don't you join me on the Live blog during the SL v Australia game tomorrow. You should see something on this tomorrow morning.

Ben, The other issue is that if your decent players go to another country to get First Class experience, you dont get any compensation whatsoever if they make the right choice for their career and future life. The Dutch opener Alexi Kerveezee is already looking at England qualification, for example. http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc_cricket_worldcup2011/content/story/502372.html