Ireland followed the route presented to them. They nailed it eventually. AFG had a different route, they nailed it too. Scotland is the next in line, or NED, to nail the routes given to them. But they are logical routes pending the formats of the time. That's the difference between ADG and IRE. Kenya, they failed big time. They are loss story for development. But SL, Ban, Ire and AFG are success stories. People at the ICC know what to do. Kenya either had a failed system, or relied too heavily on a single gifted player or two. But we all know its a team game. A player can win a single game. A team is required to win many games.raja wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 7:23 amPaddles wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:31 amDude, I love you as a cricket fan brother, and you know so much about the game and its history, but you just exposed yourself here.raja wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:28 am
3 different formats right now (maybe a 4th coming soon).
Countries that don't play Test or ODI cricket do not even need to get into the intricacies of these, if that's going to confuse them.
Let them only learn about T20 - and focus 100% on it.
If China knows only T20 from day one, they will specialise in it, and hopefully beat the crap out of BCCI one day.
See, there really is NO confusion.
You're just using this as another opportunity to bash Test cricket.
The whole ICC method is staggered.
You start with t20. Once you get good at that and rise up to a certain level. You then get 50 over opportunities. Once you get good enough at that, you then get tests.
That's the whole model. And AFG has nailed it.
Ireland and Kenya before them started before t20, so its been a bit more up and down. But the thing is, you have to prove competence at one, before you get the next. And that's a logical and fair system.
My point was as a response to GS saying multiple formats will confuse new entrants.
Clearly T20 is the easiest format to embrace for any new entrant.
There's no need for it to start off by learning other formats.
If they excel in T20, they could become Olympic champions.
That would be huge for their country - and give cricket a great boost in that country.
Whether this translates into other formats, we have to see.
If it does, fantastic.
If it doesn't, that's ok too.
You can promote a sport, but whether it will pick up or not, is not in your hands.
Cricket is competing for time with a lot of other leisure activities, not just sports.
ICC's job is to promote cricket globally.
Not just Test cricket globally.
If in 25 years' time, 100+ countries are actively playing T20 cricket (like football), there are cricket grounds in these countries, you have a UECA league (like a UEFA league) , the ICC would have done a fantastic job of promoting the game.
Maybe we have only 15 Test playing countries, because only 3 more managed to make the cut to Test cricket. (We have 12 now?)
I'd certainly like it to be more, because Test cricket (for me) has a charm, but if more countries do not adopt it, despite ICC efforts, that's ok with me.
Afghanistan and Ireland took a certain route.
Doesn't mean other countries will take the same route.
Let's have more success stories