The Woolf report

[DrVanNostrand]

bangers are 3-63 from 73 tests.

at the end of the 1950's, nz were 1-27 from 52 tests, but those tests were spread from 1930 to 1959 with only 3 played between 1933 and 1946. they went 6-18 from ~tests in the 60's which marked their arrival as a genuiunely competitive team.

i've got no problem spreading the test world because the game has to expand, but no one can rightly explain to me how bangladesh were graanted test status when kenya and ireland have been overlooked at various points despite achieving a hell of a lot more than bangladesh ever have. even netherlands have just as much right to test cricket as bangladesh.

Can't agree with you about the Netherlands. Yes, they're a competitive team on the Associate stage. But the qualification rules for them are an absolute joke. They might as well be South Africa A with an Aussie (Cooper, Swart) and a Kiwi (Borren) thrown in. There's rarely any more than 3-4 home grown players in the same side. Even their South African imports are only biding their time until they qualify for England.

You'd think the Netherlands playing in the county 40-over comp would improve their player development, but all it's done is help them recruit South African county imports with vague Dutch links.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

When you have top Aussie players saying that ODI's should be scrapped (critical to the development of world cricket), that playing tests against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe is meaningless, yes, it shows that they don't want cricket to develop.

CA threatened to move Imparja Cup from Alice Springs and NT, even though it was started in the Northern Territory and run by the NT. They say they want to develop regional cricket but it has to be on their terms, supporting PNG is no different.

You think that Australia, India, SA or England ever want to see the day when there are 15 or 20 test nations?

Most of the test playing nations don't even want Associates in the ODI World Cup.

 

[The Speaker]

Can't agree with you about the Netherlands. Yes, they're a competitive team on the Associate stage. But the qualification rules for them are an absolute joke. They might as well be South Africa A with an Aussie (Cooper, Swart) and a Kiwi (Borren) thrown in. There's rarely any more than 3-4 home grown players in the same side. Even their South African imports are only biding their time until they qualify for England.

You'd think the Netherlands playing in the county 40-over comp would improve their player development, but all it's done is help them recruit South African county imports with vague Dutch links.

It never used to be this way.

They, like many Associate nations, simply haven't had enough support from the ICC to help them continue to develop home-grown talent. Ten, fifteen years ago their team was almost entirely homegrown.

 

[The Passenger]

interesting regarding netherlands.

i must admit it's not really something i've ever looked into. probably a bit of an oversight on my part because i do like to keep up to date on the happenings of cricket outside of the test world, but at the same time it's just not something that really figures into your head because the world of kolpak and bosman rulings just don't have any influence on australian sport, aside from maybe some indrect things which i can't even think of at the moment.

by what GM says is also right. i'm not really sure if the kolpak ruling had any effect on the netherlands and south african relationship because they may have already had a previous agreement in place prior, but we can take that date (May 2003) as a marker anyway because it's as good as any.

Prior to that stage, Netherlands had 24 players play ODI cricket for them. Only Peter Cantrell (Gunnedah, NSW), Flavian Aponso (Sri Lanka), Nolan Clarke (Barbados) and Adeel Raja (Pakistan) were born outside the country.

In the period since they have had 40 representatives (some doubling up on either side of that marker), and i can't be bothered going through them one by one, but of their leading ten runscorers in that period only Bas Zuiderant (now 34 years of age)and Tom de Grooth (32) are born in the Netherlands. Of the 9 bowlers to have taken 10 wickets in those games only Pieter Seelar (24), Mark Jonkman (25) and Tim de Leede (44) are born in the Netherlands, while Edgar Shiferli (34) is unrecorded but i'm pretty sure he is Dutch born.

Regardless i don't think anyone could give the ICC a pass mark for their development of cricket outside the test world.

 

[Cap]

Most of the test playing nations don't even want Associates in the ODI World Cup.

no because of their lack of care in the development of the game...purely becuase they are uncompetitive

.

Regardless i don't think anyone could give the ICC a pass mark for their development of cricket outside the test world.

this

 

[The Passenger]

actually, can you really give them a pass mark for their development inside the test world??

zimbabwe is out of control, i'll give them that.

but they've done little to help in sri lanka with their financial woes throughout 2011 which came to a head when they were forced to postpone their first class season because the clubs didn't have enough funds.

bangladesh has been very slow progress.

and i know the west indies is a largely very unorganised but from the outside looking in there hasn't been very much support coming from elsewhere to help them out.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

no because of their lack of care in the development of the game...purely becuase they are uncompetitive

It's supposed to be a World Cup, not an exclusive club cup. Imagine if Brazil or Italian players came out and said that the didn't want one of the lower ranked teams playing in the footy world cup due to 'lack of competitiveness'.

It does my head in when people like Ricky Ponting say stuff like that.

 

[The Passenger]

It does my head in when people like Ricky Ponting say stuff like that.

for real?? it's unfortunate that people in such positions would say stuff like that.

cricket needs to take a look at rugby union, which although like anything could be done better, but does seem to be doing a much better job at promoting the game outside of traditional regions - the sevens series is now an international event, france, and then italy getting into the four and five nations, and to now make it a six nations. the world cup has expanded into 20 teams. i've heard suggestions of inviting another team. the tri nations is expanding to include argentina, and they are looking at involving teams in japan and america into the super 15.

the only area i think union has really failed has been in the pacific islands region, which is a hotbed of rugby talent but completely devoid of money and most of their players get taken by australia, new zealand, and now even over to europe... but at least on an individual level people from the pacific islands do have a chance to make it in rugby, but they still haven't fully addressed the issue of the region as a whole.

i'm sure there are people who follow the developing rugby world closer to me who could comment more, but they definately appear to be doing more than cricket has over the last decade.

which it must be said, it appeared cricket was making some strides in the 90's. more teams got let into the world cup in 1996 and more again in 1999. sri lanka won the world cup when at the previous world cup they were the weakest of the (then) 8 test playing nations (zimbabwe's first test came about 7 months after that world cup)... zimbabwe finishing 5th in the 1999 world cup, although i think there has been some suspicion placed over the south africa - zimbabwe result which enabled zimbabwe to get out of the group stages, but i could be wrong there. Regardless they were still much more competitive and had developed some quality players - andy flower, heath streak, murray goodwin and neil johnson probably the best of those....

but somewhere in the developing proffesional world of the 2000's it's all been lost. and as money becomes more and more of an issue, the gap is only going to widen and be harder to peg back....

 

[Cap]

The ICC has no defence to their pathetic attempt at developing international cricket - I don't even think they bother defending their position to be honest they just talk about TV rights these days.

as the RU - yes it does appear to be growing - I'm not involved enough to know by what scale but with Argentina joining the Tri Nations (now 4 nations) it must be an indication that there is growth going on.

Heck I read that places like Georgia (Ex USSR) are growing their game doemestically as well - good signs for the Union fans I believe.

 

[The Speaker]

www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/current/story/554006.html

 

[Light Em Up Mate]

It's supposed to be a World Cup, not an exclusive club cup. Imagine if Brazil or Italian players came out and said that the didn't want one of the lower ranked teams playing in the footy world cup due to 'lack of competitiveness'.

It does my head in when people like Ricky Ponting say stuff like that.

Well, the world cup is a rabble enough without having uncompetitive smaller nations in the competition.

Those smaller teams should tour full test playing nations and play 'a' teams.

Better gauge of their development.

 

[Cap]

www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/current/story/554006.html

good start