ODI cricket and general cricketing discussion [self - mod]

[ene1980]

Sometimes these upsets are pre-planned for whatever reasons.

Are you claiming that the match was fixed, Asian teams had the reputation of fixing matches and Pakistan had the reputation of fixing matches in the past but i do not think none of the players will dare to do that with the sentencing that faced some of their players and the media trail that followed and ruined their career.
Fixing might happen in league T20 games but not in the international level.

[1714472248]

1714472248

[1714472248]

1714472248

[1714472248]

1714472248

[Swordsoffreedom]

Your point is correct. But I don't think it's a problem of their players. This is the problem of their cricket board or the team management. Their management should ensure all facilities to the cricketers. And obviously their rules should be strictly followed. They have a lot of internal problems in the cricket board. Most people are corrupted. Even last year the ICC decided to ban them for political interference on the board.
Here is the link : https://www.aljazeera.com/sports/2019/7/18/zimbabwe-cricket-suspended-over-political-interference

The ICC should have continued with the suspension until they sort out their issues. Now they have the test status, and as a result they get around $100 million in funding for the 8-year circle. Better teams, such as Ireland and Afghanistan receive only a fraction of this amount. And the most tragic thing is that most of this amount is lost in corruption and bureaucracy.

That's right. I totally agree with you. ICC should have banned Zimbabwe or solved all their internal problems. 100 million dollars is a huge amount for a team like Zimbabwe. The ICC should be re-investigated on the Zimbabwe board. There are still a lot of corrupt people on their board.

[UmerIdrees]

Sometimes these upsets are pre-planned for whatever reasons.

Are you claiming that the match was fixed, Asian teams had the reputation of fixing matches and Pakistan had the reputation of fixing matches in the past but i do not think none of the players will dare to do that with the sentencing that faced some of their players and the media trail that followed and ruined their career.
Fixing might happen in league T20 games but not in the international level.

Match fixing happen everywhere including in International cricket.
If Pakistan had lost the match by a big margin, i would have confirmed that the match would have been fixed but i doubt this match was fixed because it went in the super over. Fixed matches don't go to the last ball for the decider.

[Vishnu.Reang]

That's right. I totally agree with you. ICC should have banned Zimbabwe or solved all their internal problems. 100 million dollars is a huge amount for a team like Zimbabwe. The ICC should be re-investigated on the Zimbabwe board. There are still a lot of corrupt people on their board.

Right now, if a nation gets full member status, it is permanent. Even if they can't field a decent playing XI, the full member status can't be revoked. This needs to be changed. Associate nations that are performing well (with native players obviously) needs to be elevated to test status. At the same time, teams such as Zimbabwe needs to be kicked back to the Associate status.

[Indymoney]

That's right. I totally agree with you. ICC should have banned Zimbabwe or solved all their internal problems. 100 million dollars is a huge amount for a team like Zimbabwe. The ICC should be re-investigated on the Zimbabwe board. There are still a lot of corrupt people on their board.

Right now, if a nation gets full member status, it is permanent. Even if they can't field a decent playing XI, the full member status can't be revoked. This needs to be changed. Associate nations that are performing well (with native players obviously) needs to be elevated to test status. At the same time, teams such as Zimbabwe needs to be kicked back to the Associate status.

Now ICC need to bring some better and solid rules for better future of cricket if any team is not giving good result then send back to Associated status and bring up team from Associated status to Full Member status as this will give some good competition to all and equal chance for giving 100% right now Zimbabwe surely deserve to go down.

[bryant.coleman]

Now ICC need to bring some better and solid rules for better future of cricket if any team is not giving good result then send back to Associated status and bring up team from Associated status to Full Member status as this will give some good competition to all and equal chance for giving 100% right now Zimbabwe surely deserve to go down.

ICC is a joke, when compared to other sports bodies such as FIFA and FIH. They don't have any power and they have hardly any interest in spreading the game beyond the traditional base. They can't even conduct the election for the post of chairman, and it has been vacant for the last few months. In short, no one cares about the ICC and the power lies within individual boards such as the BCCI, CA and ECB.

[JohnBitCo]

As expected, the match between Pakistan and Zimbabwe turned out to be another one sided affair. The Zimbabwe batsmen did a somewhat decent job, but their bowlers failed once again. I don't understand the point in having a series such as this one, between two teams of unequal strength. Zimbabwe needs to be kept out, at least until their performance improves.

Although Zimbabwe lost the series but i don't agree that they should not play tournaments and series with big teams. These series will help them to find their mistakes and become a better team. If they don't play international cricket, their performance can never be improved.

Then the same logic should be applicable for teams such as Scotland and Nepal, right? They never get a chance to play against the bigger teams, while Zimbabwe plays 95% of their matches against such teams. I have no problem if Zimbabwe plays 50% of their matches against the top teams. But why can't the ICC ask them to play the remaining 50% against teams such as Scotland?

After seeing the last ODI match between Zimbabwe and Pakistan, you must have realized why Zimbabwe is given more international matches then other small teams like Scotland and Nepal.

In the past the Zimbabwe cricket team was quite a good team which had players like Grand flower and Andy flower. Later their board was involved in so much politics they failed to produce good world class players.

Their team still have potential and players like Muzarabani are worth watching but their team needs discipline and no politics of course.

[Indymoney]

As expected, the match between Pakistan and Zimbabwe turned out to be another one sided affair. The Zimbabwe batsmen did a somewhat decent job, but their bowlers failed once again. I don't understand the point in having a series such as this one, between two teams of unequal strength. Zimbabwe needs to be kept out, at least until their performance improves.

Although Zimbabwe lost the series but i don't agree that they should not play tournaments and series with big teams. These series will help them to find their mistakes and become a better team. If they don't play international cricket, their performance can never be improved.

Then the same logic should be applicable for teams such as Scotland and Nepal, right? They never get a chance to play against the bigger teams, while Zimbabwe plays 95% of their matches against such teams. I have no problem if Zimbabwe plays 50% of their matches against the top teams. But why can't the ICC ask them to play the remaining 50% against teams such as Scotland?

After seeing the last ODI match between Zimbabwe and Pakistan, you must have realized why Zimbabwe is given more international matches then other small teams like Scotland and Nepal.

In the past the Zimbabwe cricket team was quite a good team which had players like Grand flower and Andy flower. Later their board was involved in so much politics they failed to produce good world class players.

Their team still have potential and players like Muzarabani are worth watching but their team needs discipline and no politics of course.

Currently situation in Zimbabwae is completely worst Board is involved in politics and government is not doing any good and positive thing for settling things too many young and talented players losing their future as they have nothing good and positive thing for future its some long way planing to settle things and bring back good days back which is more serious concern as no one is on right position for right move.

[FIFA worldcup]

That's right. I totally agree with you. ICC should have banned Zimbabwe or solved all their internal problems. 100 million dollars is a huge amount for a team like Zimbabwe. The ICC should be re-investigated on the Zimbabwe board. There are still a lot of corrupt people on their board.

Right now, if a nation gets full member status, it is permanent. Even if they can't field a decent playing XI, the full member status can't be revoked. This needs to be changed. Associate nations that are performing well (with native players obviously) needs to be elevated to test status. At the same time, teams such as Zimbabwe needs to be kicked back to the Associate status.

Do you have a complete list of countries which are included in the test status and associate status ?
I know that countries are granted test status but didn't knew about this associate status. What is a criteria of a team to be included in associate status and test status ?

[7788bitcoin]

Do you have a complete list of countries which are included in the test status and associate status ?
I know that countries are granted test status but didn't knew about this associate status. What is a criteria of a team to be included in associate status and test status ?

The following are the teams with Test status

• Australia 
• England 
• South Africa 
• West Indies
• New Zealand 
• India
• Pakistan 
• Sri Lanka 
• Zimbabwe 
• Bangladesh

Two teams included recently

• Ireland
• Afghanistan

As per the ICC site they have 92 Associate Members, the only criteria is performance as a team and winnings matches consistently among associate members.
 
 


 
 
 

[shamimal93]

As expected, the match between Pakistan and Zimbabwe turned out to be another one sided affair. The Zimbabwe batsmen did a somewhat decent job, but their bowlers failed once again. I don't understand the point in having a series such as this one, between two teams of unequal strength. Zimbabwe needs to be kept out, at least until their performance improves.

Although Zimbabwe lost the series but i don't agree that they should not play tournaments and series with big teams. These series will help them to find their mistakes and become a better team. If they don't play international cricket, their performance can never be improved.

Then the same logic should be applicable for teams such as Scotland and Nepal, right? They never get a chance to play against the bigger teams, while Zimbabwe plays 95% of their matches against such teams. I have no problem if Zimbabwe plays 50% of their matches against the top teams. But why can't the ICC ask them to play the remaining 50% against teams such as Scotland?

After seeing the last ODI match between Zimbabwe and Pakistan, you must have realized why Zimbabwe is given more international matches then other small teams like Scotland and Nepal.

In the past the Zimbabwe cricket team was quite a good team which had players like Grand flower and Andy flower. Later their board was involved in so much politics they failed to produce good world class players.

Their team still have potential and players like Muzarabani are worth watching but their team needs discipline and no politics of course.

There is no time to underestimate Zimbabwe.  They are definitely a good team.  Once upon a time, Green Flower and Andy Flower walked the entire cricket field.  But in the middle the way cricket is ruined is because the cricket board is involved in politics.  There are still good players in the Zimbabwean team.  Brendon Taylor, Williams, Sikandar Raja, they are very good players.  They can turn the tide of any match at any time.  The way they played with Pakistan shows that Zimbabwe is not over yet.  Only the Zimbabwe team needs discipline.  If they can play in an orderly manner then they will get back to their old days.  However, tomorrow is their first T20 match against Pakistan.  Hopefully tomorrow we will see a competitive game.

[Vishnu.Reang]

Do you have a complete list of countries which are included in the test status and associate status ?
I know that countries are granted test status but didn't knew about this associate status. What is a criteria of a team to be included in associate status and test status ?

You can get the list of full members and associate members here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_International_Cricket_Council_members

As of now, there are 12 full members and 92 Associate members (of them 8 are having ODI status). On top of this, there are 5 more members whose membership has been suspended - Morocco, Cuba, Brunei, Tonga and Switzerland.

Also, regional bodies may be having more countries as members. For example, Tajikistan, Cambodia and Taiwan are members of the Asian Cricket Council, but they don't have ICC membership.

[UmerIdrees]

As expected, the match between Pakistan and Zimbabwe turned out to be another one sided affair. The Zimbabwe batsmen did a somewhat decent job, but their bowlers failed once again. I don't understand the point in having a series such as this one, between two teams of unequal strength. Zimbabwe needs to be kept out, at least until their performance improves.

Although Zimbabwe lost the series but i don't agree that they should not play tournaments and series with big teams. These series will help them to find their mistakes and become a better team. If they don't play international cricket, their performance can never be improved.

Then the same logic should be applicable for teams such as Scotland and Nepal, right? They never get a chance to play against the bigger teams, while Zimbabwe plays 95% of their matches against such teams. I have no problem if Zimbabwe plays 50% of their matches against the top teams. But why can't the ICC ask them to play the remaining 50% against teams such as Scotland?

After seeing the last ODI match between Zimbabwe and Pakistan, you must have realized why Zimbabwe is given more international matches then other small teams like Scotland and Nepal.

In the past the Zimbabwe cricket team was quite a good team which had players like Grand flower and Andy flower. Later their board was involved in so much politics they failed to produce good world class players.

Their team still have potential and players like Muzarabani are worth watching but their team needs discipline and no politics of course.

There is no time to underestimate Zimbabwe.  They are definitely a good team.  Once upon a time, Green Flower and Andy Flower walked the entire cricket field.  But in the middle the way cricket is ruined is because the cricket board is involved in politics.  There are still good players in the Zimbabwean team.  Brendon Taylor, Williams, Sikandar Raja, they are very good players.  They can turn the tide of any match at any time.  The way they played with Pakistan shows that Zimbabwe is not over yet.  Only the Zimbabwe team needs discipline.  If they can play in an orderly manner then they will get back to their old days.  However, tomorrow is their first T20 match against Pakistan.  Hopefully tomorrow we will see a competitive game.

I totally respect your point of view but please do not write your posts in Bold. This is against the writing ethics and also annoys the reader.
Bold is only used to highlight certain words and/sentence which has some importance with the text.

[Sithara007]

Here is a summary of the ICC members:

12 with test status (full-member status)
8 with ODI status, but without test status (associate)
84 with just T20I status (associate)
5 with no international status and suspended

These numbers might look impressive, but they hide the failure of ICC to spread cricket beyond the commonwealth. Apart from a few countries such as PNG, Vanuatu and Fiji, in most of the cases these teams are fully comprised of expats from India and Pakistan. Most of the teams don't even have a single citizen of that country. Other sports bodies such as FIFA and FIH doesn't allow this, but ICC allows countries to field such expat-only teams. FIBA even have a limit for naturalized citizens. But ICC doesn't have any limit for foreigners.

[eaLiTy]

These numbers might look impressive, but they hide the failure of ICC to spread cricket beyond the commonwealth. Apart from a few countries such as PNG, Vanuatu and Fiji, in most of the cases these teams are fully comprised of expats from India and Pakistan. Most of the teams don't even have a single citizen of that country. Other sports bodies such as FIFA and FIH doesn't allow this, but ICC allows countries to field such expat-only teams. FIBA even have a limit for naturalized citizens. But ICC doesn't have any limit for foreigners.

You cannot blame the ICC for this, you cannot attract people to play cricket if their pay scale is just not up to par with the rest of the sporting events in that country. Since you have Fiji in the list their main sporting event is Rugby and Netball and Vanuatu have football as their popular sport. If you have a situation like that the ICC have no other option than to allow anyone who is competent enough to play the game.

[Sithara007]

You cannot blame the ICC for this, you cannot attract people to play cricket if their pay scale is just not up to par with the rest of the sporting events in that country. Since you have Fiji in the list their main sporting event is Rugby and Netball and Vanuatu have football as their popular sport. If you have a situation like that the ICC have no other option than to allow anyone who is competent enough to play the game.

It is possible to get natives play cricket. Many of the European teams had majority of natives in their squad until 10-15 years ago. Now they are almost entirely comprised of expats, after the ICC changed their rules. Financials have nothing to do with it. If that is the case, then even the expats won't play the game. In Fiji, Vanuatu.etc, the teams are mostly comprised of natives. But that is not the case in European and American countries.

[FIFA worldcup]

You cannot blame the ICC for this, you cannot attract people to play cricket if their pay scale is just not up to par with the rest of the sporting events in that country. Since you have Fiji in the list their main sporting event is Rugby and Netball and Vanuatu have football as their popular sport. If you have a situation like that the ICC have no other option than to allow anyone who is competent enough to play the game.

It is possible to get natives play cricket. Many of the European teams had majority of natives in their squad until 10-15 years ago. Now they are almost entirely comprised of expats, after the ICC changed their rules. Financials have nothing to do with it. If that is the case, then even the expats won't play the game. In Fiji, Vanuatu.etc, the teams are mostly comprised of natives. But that is not the case in European and American countries.

If both the natives and expats are included in the team this will give more quality players to the countries who lack cricketing infrastructure. Also this will help promote cricket and after sometime natives will also become interested in this sports.

[JSRAW]

-SA hosting England for White ball cricket, just waiting for Gov's permission (Nov-Dec)

Proteas's Gov gave a green light and England tour of South Africa is good to go for 3 ODI and 3 T-20.

CSA making some efforts to bring back cricket season asap. They are in talk with the SriLankan board for Red ball cricket around Dec-Jan.

Update

England announced their T-20/ODI Squad for South Africa tour

https://www.cricbuzz.com/cricket-news/114776/england-pick-23-players-for-south-africa-tour

England Men's IT20 Squad:Eoin Morgan (captain), Moeen Ali, Jofra Archer, Jonathan Bairstow, Sam Billings, Jos Buttler, Sam Curran, Tom Curran, Chris Jordan, Dawid Malan, Adil Rashid, Jason Roy, Ben Stokes, Reece Topley, Mark Wood

England Men's ODI Squad:Eoin Morgan(captain), Moeen Ali, Jonathan Bairstow, Sam Billings, Jos Buttler, Tom Curran, Lewis Gregory, Liam Livingstone, Adil Rashid, Joe Root, Jason Roy, Olly Stone, Reece Topley, Chris Woakes, Mark Wood

Reserves across both formats:Jake Ball, Tom Banton, Tom Helm

Update

South Africa also announced their 24 Men squad for the White ball cricket against England. Another positive news is, Proteas Delegation checking security-situation in the Pakistan, there is good chance that they might tour Pakistan in near future.

[Vishnu.Reang]

I wasn't expecting much from the South African selectors. But this is even worse than my worst fears. Once again they have included sub-standard players just because of their skin color. How many chances are they going to give to Temba Bavuma? And they included Junior Dala. Seriously? This guy was given tons of opportunities in the past and never made use of any of it. These people are completely hopeless.

[Juggy777]

I wasn't expecting much from the South African selectors. But this is even worse than my worst fears. Once again they have included sub-standard players just because of their skin color. How many chances are they going to give to Temba Bavuma? And they included Junior Dala. Seriously? This guy was given tons of opportunities in the past and never made use of any of it. These people are completely hopeless.

@Vishnu.Reang in the past I too used to get upset by their selections based on player’s skin colours, but after a while I decided to stop bothering about it because they will never change their selection policies. Lastly it may be quite possible that they don’t have any other better player in the skin colour quota to replace him, and that’s why he’s getting selected again and again?.

Source:

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/35590-south-african-cricket-race-has-always-played-a-role (Old article but sadly yet valid).