Quality of Test cricket

Renno

A bit of a bugbear of mine, the way modern commentators becry the quality of teams like Bangladesh/Zimbabwe (and Ireland in a few years), and how they shouldn't play Test cricket until they've got better.

But this viewpoint conveniently ignores the way it's always been. Sides new to test cricket have always struggle. Bangladesh have six completed Tests against England. Here are the comparative records for England against the other "new" Test countries in the first six Tests.

• South Africa (1889-96). England won 6 (8 wkts, inn & 202 runs, inn & 189 runs, 288 runs, inn & 197 runs, inn & 33runs)

• West Indies (1928-30). England won 4 (inn & 58 runs, inn & 30 runs, inn & 71 runs, 167 runs), drew 1 and lost 1 (289 runs)

• New Zealand (1930-31). England won 2 (8 wkts and inn & 26 runs) and drew 4

• India (1932-36). England won 4 (158 runs, 9 wkts, 202 runs and 9 wkts) and drew 2

• Pakistan (1954-62). England won 2 (inn & 129 runs, 5 wkts), drew 3 and lost 1 (24 runs)

• Sri Lanka (1982-98) England won 3 (7 wkts, 7 wkts and 137 runs), drew 1 and lost 2 ( 5 wkts and 10 wkts)

• Zimbabwe (1996-2003) England won 3 (inn & 209 runs, inn & 92 runs, inn & 69 runs) and drew 3

• Bangladesh (2003-10) England won 6 (7 wkts, 329 runs, inn & 261 runs, inn & 27 runs, 181 runs & 9 wkts)

West Indies had their win in Constantine's match, Pakistan obviously were spawned from an existing Test playing country and Sri Lanka had been playing Test cricket for 11 years before England bothered to give them their fourth match. With covered pitches and modern drainage it's likely that England would have converted many of those draws to wins, and other country's would have had the same record as Banglasdesh.

The moral being? The Bangladesh/Zimbabwes of this world are no worse than other countries who were starting out many years ago and vintage superstars plundered poor bowling attacks as much as modern players (Bradman averaged 201 against SA & 179 vs India), or took cheap wickets (Trueman averaged 14 against India, 19 against New Zealand, 20 against Pakistan).

And finally Ireland wouldn't neccessarily be out of place if they were given the chance.

booth70

Excellent post...the timing of which couldn't have been more appropriate as yesterday was one of Bangladesh's best days in test cricket ever....Its more than likely they will capitulate this morning and lose this test by a mile but what a spectacle it was watching Tamim Iqbal race to a hundred and celebrate....well played young man:)

One things for sure watching yesterdays play....England wont retain the Ashes with 4 bowlers on the flat belters in Australia.

booth70

What a contrast the recent Pak v Aus series was to the mind numbing bore taking place in SriLanka at the moment...Sangakkara helps himself to a double to follow his century in the first test and no doubt the Indians will gorge themselves when they bat.

TOTALLY POINTLESS test match cricket between the 'World no 1' team that does not have bowlers that can take more than 6 wickets per test match let alone per innings and a country that could potentially go to the top of the ICC rankings after this series despite never having won a test match in Australia or South Africa ever:(

Rant over