'What's the point of Associate cricket?' - Beyond the Test World at Cricinfo

Deutrom has made no secret of his ambition to see Ireland play Test cricket, but he admitted there was little prospect of that happening in the near future. And, without that goal, he concluded, what was the point of the Associate merry-go-round.

“Three or four years from now there will be no new entrants in to the cosy club of full Test members. That is a significant frustration. It shows that despite the massive investment in the Associate programme, costing over £200 million over seven years, there is no stepping stone from No.1 of the Associate countries, into the Test world.

“Inclusion in the Future Tours programme gives guaranteed fixtures, which allows the CI board to put together a commercial package with some certainty. This makes it interesting for broadcasters, and then sponsors, ticketing and hospitality. Currently, we don’t know what next year’s fixtures are going to be. We are not saying that Ireland deserves to be a Test nation tomorrow but what steps do we need to take to get there?”

In a separate conversation, Deutrom told Cricinfo: “We are all aware that there is no established pathway to Test cricket for Associates, and ascension to the Full Member ranks by (for example) Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh appears to have happened rather haphazardly. For me, having top Associates playing the bottom-ranked Test teams is pure common sense and the first step in breaching the glass ceiling separating the Full Member and Associate world.”

I agree with Warren Deutrom, the Associates get treated like 2nd class citizens in Cricket. What is the purpose of Intercontential Cup (IC) ... does winning mean anything?

I recommend:
* Zimbarbwe enter full side in 2009/10 IC.
* ICC Announce winner of 2009/10 IC will fill vacant 10th Test Spot (Zimb's) for 2011-2012.
* Future Tours replaced in 2013 with 2 Tier (1-6,7-12) playing home & away (10 test series) over 3 years.
* ICC Announce winner & runner up of 2011/12 IC will join Teams 7-12 in Tier 2.
* IC expanded to be 12 teams playing 11 games + Final over 3 years.

At end of 2015:
* Teams 1 & 2 play home & away series for World Test Cup.
* Team 6 demoted to Tier 2 & Team 7 promoted to Tier 1.
* Team 5 & Team 8 play home & away series where winner promoted to Tier 1, loser demoted to Tier 2.
* Team 12 demoted to IC & Winner of IC promoted to Tier 2.
* Team 11 & runner up of IC play home & away series where winner promoted to Tier 2, loser demoted to IC.

I agree with Terry Jones idea of two-tier relegation system for test cricket with associate cricket getting a chance to rub shoulders with best players consistently.But i don't believe World Test Cup will ever be a reality as cricket seems to be drifting more towards shorter form of the game, with IPL and other-such league(Champions league) getting more prominence in the future tour schedules.Regarding handling of non-Test playing nations,ICC has missed a simple common-sense idea of promotion/relegation in the test ranking system,it is really sad that ICC dont have a road-map for Test status.

The onus has to be on the ICC to promote more teams to test status. IC isn't enough for Associates; you learn through a trial of fire in cricket. NZ and Bangladesh both had bad starts to test match cricket, but are working on becoming valuable members of the elite test playing spectrum.

The ICC should aim to induct 2 new test playing teams every 10 years if it expects to survive. Have the appointments run parallel to the Future Tours Program so there aren't any scheduling conflicts.

Cricket is currently the only game on Earth that refuses to expand at a professional level. What if world class soccer was restricted to 10 nations? It wouldn't work. The ICC should open the doors for more nations to play. Whether they then need to introduce a Tiered system of test class, then so be it. Sitting on 9 (ZIM can't count) test match teams out of 200 nations is unacceptable.

Would also mean that England stops stealing players from Ireland and Scotland also.

To add to what Terry Jones has said...
There should be different selection criteria for different format of the game. Some associate nations should be provided with temporary test status, which can be decided with Intercontinental Cup. The temporary ODI status can be decided with the ICC WCQ and for temporary status of T20Internationals, there needs to be separate tournament like T20-WCQ.

ICC can put its restrictions as far as maximum number of matches in a calender year is concerned. The FTP should also be created so that all the associate nations play atleast once against all the full members over the span of 4 years.

The rate at which Twenty20 is growing is such that major change will come naturally. After all, the ICC may control world cricket, but who is to say that in a few years' time there won't be an alternate orginazation with true global representation for this great game? The ICC needs to wake up to the fact there are a number of nations with huge potential, yet are denied an opportunity to shine in the global stage. Shame really.

The two tiered idea is no more beneficial than what is in place now. All that would happen is that Tier 2 essentially becomes like the Intercontinental Cup (nobody knows about it and it isn't broadcast) and Tier 1 will become like the current test competition. Which TV broadcasters are going to want to pay for the rights to broadcast Tier 2 test cricket? The same ones who won't pay for Intercontinental Cup cricket now?

Surely the best way to go is to just have Ireland and Kenya become Test countries and then spread out the FTP some more so that we don't have this overdosing of cricket like now.

Also, as much as I admire Irish cricket, Deutrom doesn't know what he is talking about. The ICC clearly has full membership requirements on its website: http://icc-cricket.yahoo.net/about-icc/rules-regulations.html

It's there for everyone to see (in the most logical section to wit). It's not even that long - only 2 pages in Adobe PDF reader. Among the requirements:

"a country must play regular first class cricket (domestic 3/4 day competition) before playing Test cricket."

Seeing as how there isn't even 2-day domestic cricket in Ireland I don't see how Deutrom can be complaining. As it is, the Irish team has fulfilled (most of) it's part of the requirements but CI and Deutrom haven't. Maybe he should stop griping and actual read the requirements and implement them...you know like the Netherlands and Kenya are actually trying to do.

The ICC might rightly ask "what's the point in having requirements that nobody bothers to read?"

How about creating 3 status levels above associates: T20, ODI and Test.
A team at certain status level can play only that format and it's lower level format of the game with others.

A team gets permanently promoted to T20 status if it satisfies any of these
1. it qualifies for ICC world T20 for consecutive 5 times (i.e. perform at that level for 10 years)
2. it qualifies and plays at 2nd round of ICC world T20 for consecutive 4 times
3. it qualifies and plays a semi final of ICC word T20 for consecutive 2 times
4. it qualifies and plays a final of ICC word T20

Similar conditions can be created to gain ODI status but with ODI world cups.

An ODI team gains test status if it's ICC ODI rank points differ only by 20 from the last ranked Test team in ICC ODI rank table.

Say, in the ICC ODI rank table team 'Abc' stands last among other Test nations and Abc's point is x. Now an ODI gains Test status if it's point is x - 20 in the table.

I dont about whether test status should be awarded to more associate nations or not, but i want to see the game expanding at T20 level, i believe the worldt20 should be organized every year, and the number of teams must be increase by 2 every year as well.And this way the number of teams participating in worldt20 must increased to 20+ in 4-5years time.The tournament must be held in various associate nations in order to globalize the game.I think new test nation will only make test more dull n boring, since they will not be able to cope-up with the test pro's.It does not matter what the test purist thinks but t20 is the ultimate destination if ICC want to really globalize the game.If anyone says worldt20 every year along with IPL, n champleague every year will overkill cricket, then let tell say b4 t20 was born we had overdose of test n odi tournaments too,its better to reduce the quantity of test n odi and enhance the quality,and organize more t20 because it entertains people.

Mr Deutrom should thank his lucky stars. Kenya reached the semi-finals of the 2003 world cup and were given no fixtures at all (the Sharjah cup aside) for nearly two years. At least there is now a better system for associates now. The Test club should be expanded but in a responsible fashion.

What ho, Colin! Haven't seen you in at least 7 years...

I have read all of the comments that have been written. everyone does have a valid point. In relation to Mr Deutrom's point about what direction do Ireland take. The ICC does have a very poor record of organising cricket globally, and assisting smaller nations. For example they seem to have no grip on the appropriate strucutre cricket should have. With no clear strucute for a world test championship, cricket will always suffer as the T20 & 50 over WC will always be a poor relation. furthermore who is the best cricket nation in the world? we can only guess with the various formatts of the game avavilable. so the underlying problem is a legitimate world test chamionship, properly organised & set up it would eliminate alot of issues, and raise the profile of the game. Ireland is in a difficult position. I agree with some of the other bcontributors that if they do not set up regular 3 and 4 day cricket they cannot really hope to establish themselevs as a test nation.

with regards to Ireland chances of developing their cricket, the ECB do pose a problem. Ireland has produced good players, many of whom play county cricket. they can gain ECB registration very quickly and be offered the opportunity to play test cricket, undermining the Irish cause. even if Ireland were to set up a 3 /4 day program, how many up and coming players would turn down the chance to cross the waters for a lucrative county cricket contract? Unless Ireland could set up a semi pro league and attract overseas players also then why should they stay if they could earn a good living in england? even thought the english counties are indirectly helping develop young Irish cricketers threough there junior ranks,they cant stop the best ones from representing england. with all due respect Bangladesh never lost their top players to India, or kenya loose players to zimbabwe or south africa. I do feel that South africa has not helped kenya enough also, but that is a seperate issue.

In regards to my earlier 2 tier system recommendation, if ICC wants to keep it as a 1 tier system (which I disagree with), I recommend the following:
* Zimbarbwe enter full side in 2009/10 Intercontential Cup (IC).
* ICC Announce winner of 2009/10 IC will fill vacant 10th Test Spot (Zimb's) for 2011-2012.
* ICC Announce 9th Test team (Bang) & winner of 9/10 IC will field teams in 11/12 IC.
* ICC Announce winner & runner-up of 2011/12 IC will fill 9th & 10th Test spots for 2013-2014.

This system would allow:
* Top 10 Teams to continue to play home & away over 5 year periods.
* Teams 9 & 10 play winable matches in IC.
* Teams 11+ to get experience against the lowest 2 test teams.
* Teams 11+ to have a winable path to play test cricket.

This would fill the calls from Ireland, Scotland and Netherlands for a path to play test cricket and experience against the lowest test teams.

In relation to Arsad bin Sailav's comments, the ICL is totally different. yes I agree that they cannot play test cricket whilst theyare banned, but do these players take up Indian nationality? no they do not. The good irish players are lost to the England. If Eion Morgan & Ed Joyce are good enough to be qualified for England and paly, why can't they keep their Irish status and become part of an irish test side? This is the big Irish problem. they do need to set up a 3/4 day program, but they need to make sure if the best players go off to play for the counties they don't loose them as they are going for test status.

To Arsad bin Sailav ireland would beat bangladesh in irish/english conditions anyday of the week.
Ireland would be better if we had a professional provincial championship (4 day). But crcket is ameteur and england keep on poaching our players.
Ireland have alot of their players playing in england. Ireland would demolish every team in the intercontinental championship. If we had all our players.
Also why is zim still a full member no-one will play them in a test and they haven't for some time.

So what Bangladesh won against West Indies Depleted Side does that take credit away from Bangladesh if West Indies Full Side would have been there then Bangladesh would have lost inngs defeat. Same with Ireland Eion Morgan was taken by England and Ed joyce too Botha was also not their for Ireland

every five years, the top two associate teams, prob ireland and holland should play the two worst test teams in a relegation/promotion test series

either that or the associate nations should pool their best players and form one test team, look at the last ten years, david hemp, niall o'brien, steve tikolo, ed joyce, amjad khan, ryan ten doeschate, kyle coetzer,could have easiy made a competitive test team, would have won more than 1 in 65 or whatever bangaladesh's record was