The road to the 2011 World Cup begins here
It may be three long years years away, but the road to the 2011 World Cup begins this week in the unlikely setting of Jersey
It may be three long years years away, but the road to the 2011 World Cup begins this week in the unlikely setting of Jersey. More famed for its cattle and potatoes than a venue for cricket tournaments, Jersey plays host to 12 of the world's lesser-known teams in Division 5 of the World Cricket League (WCL), as they battle to climb the ladder to the fourth division and dream of a World Cup place in Asia.
Will Luke previews Division 5 of the World Cricket League which gets underway this week.
Will Luke is assistant editor of ESPNcricinfo
©
ESPN Sports Media Ltd.
Comments have now been closed for this article
In cricket AFghanistan is on top now a days in Division 5 and they beat unbeatable teams like Jersy, Nepal Afghanistan is on top and if they supported will beat all the world... Wish them best of luck and success forever.
The 2007 Cricket World Cup final was played in West Indies. Australia vs SriLanka. It was a mess day, with heavy rain. The organizers could have made a reserve day for the match because it was the final. But the match was played with 38 overs and this do not look good for a final. People with so many expectations coming to watch the match need to be satisfied too. Also the prestigious game of 50 overs being not considered on that day by making it just 38 overs. It is also difficult to a team to adopt quickly to such a game, specially when it is the finals. Don't mind who wins the game but, when in situations like this the ICC or the organizers must definitely try to or must keep an extra day.
i agree its a good idea to have the lesser known countries involved in qualification for the world cup and i think instead of 12 teams it should be 16,but i think the future of some of these countries involved is to stay minnows for life.
i think icc should hand pick countries who might oneday play test cricket like afghanistan and the usa.i dont think vanautu,bahamas or jersey will ever play test cricket.i think countries like fiji and vanuatu should combine into a united pacific islands team and jersey should along with scotland join the english domestic comp.bahamas should join the west indies domestic comp.this frees up qualifing positions.
the sad thing about having 12 teams is one will be ireland thats fine thier a independent country,but the other will be scotland which not a indepedent country at the exspense of future test playing countries.
the icc should focus on countries that will one day play tests like afghanistan,nepal,kenya,usa,holland,china and canada
i think that if they are born in the country they play for its fine but if they are foreign born that shouldnt be aloud except if they have lived in the country for a long time and speak the countries language.
In a multicultural society, to divide people into `natives' and `non-natives' is a deeply misguided anachronism. There is nothing wrong with people of subcontinental descent who have moved to and integrated themselves in a different country representing that country. Should Monty Panesar, Nasser Hussain and so on be ineligible for England?! I know for a fact that the Norwegian squad is made up of Norwegians - of subcontinental descent, but Norwegians.
And how do you think the game spread in the first place? By your argument, Shakil, there would never have been cricket anywhere except in England. As with any aspect of culture, there is a natural evolution: cricket is first brought and played by immigrants, and eventually it may grow in popularity.
Like planting seeds, not every country will grow to love cricket. But the more countries play and are encouraged to develop the game, the more places it will take root.
Shakil, the number or lack of "native" cricketers is a concern. However, I can assure you that these are all Japanese: Irie, Murata, Kobayashi, Miyaji, Kamatani, Chino, Hagihara, Kobayashi, Matsubara, Nakano
what is the point. all the team bar Nepal and Afghans are full of expatriates (i.e. people from sub-continent). If you can not take the game to the natives the status quo would continue. Look what happened to soccer in the USA; till soccer mom arrived it was a foreigners game; now it is the fastest growing game. People of subcontinent would watch the game no matter where the live because this is only game where they are masters of universe
I think the ICC deserves credit for the World Cricket League. The divisional system is excellent - it rewards success, which is crucial at the lower levels, giving an incentive for improvement.
There's some decent teams even at this level though - I'm surprised to the see the US down here, they were ranked in the best 14 or 16 in the world not so long ago. It's not quite clear from the article, but maybe this is a consequence of their suspension from the ICC? Nepal also have beaten test nations at U19 level.
My dark horse: Norway. There is a very decent grass roots infrastructure on the south-east coast of the country, around Oslo and down. They are in by far the tougher of the two groups though - Afghanistan will stroll to the top of Group B I imagine.
In cricket AFghanistan is on top now a days in Division 5 and they beat unbeatable teams like Jersy, Nepal Afghanistan is on top and if they supported will beat all the world... Wish them best of luck and success forever.
The 2007 Cricket World Cup final was played in West Indies. Australia vs SriLanka. It was a mess day, with heavy rain. The organizers could have made a reserve day for the match because it was the final. But the match was played with 38 overs and this do not look good for a final. People with so many expectations coming to watch the match need to be satisfied too. Also the prestigious game of 50 overs being not considered on that day by making it just 38 overs. It is also difficult to a team to adopt quickly to such a game, specially when it is the finals. Don't mind who wins the game but, when in situations like this the ICC or the organizers must definitely try to or must keep an extra day.
i agree its a good idea to have the lesser known countries involved in qualification for the world cup and i think instead of 12 teams it should be 16,but i think the future of some of these countries involved is to stay minnows for life.
i think icc should hand pick countries who might oneday play test cricket like afghanistan and the usa.i dont think vanautu,bahamas or jersey will ever play test cricket.i think countries like fiji and vanuatu should combine into a united pacific islands team and jersey should along with scotland join the english domestic comp.bahamas should join the west indies domestic comp.this frees up qualifing positions.
the sad thing about having 12 teams is one will be ireland thats fine thier a independent country,but the other will be scotland which not a indepedent country at the exspense of future test playing countries.
the icc should focus on countries that will one day play tests like afghanistan,nepal,kenya,usa,holland,china and canada
i think that if they are born in the country they play for its fine but if they are foreign born that shouldnt be aloud except if they have lived in the country for a long time and speak the countries language.
In a multicultural society, to divide people into `natives' and `non-natives' is a deeply misguided anachronism. There is nothing wrong with people of subcontinental descent who have moved to and integrated themselves in a different country representing that country. Should Monty Panesar, Nasser Hussain and so on be ineligible for England?! I know for a fact that the Norwegian squad is made up of Norwegians - of subcontinental descent, but Norwegians.
And how do you think the game spread in the first place? By your argument, Shakil, there would never have been cricket anywhere except in England. As with any aspect of culture, there is a natural evolution: cricket is first brought and played by immigrants, and eventually it may grow in popularity.
Like planting seeds, not every country will grow to love cricket. But the more countries play and are encouraged to develop the game, the more places it will take root.
Shakil, the number or lack of "native" cricketers is a concern. However, I can assure you that these are all Japanese: Irie, Murata, Kobayashi, Miyaji, Kamatani, Chino, Hagihara, Kobayashi, Matsubara, Nakano
what is the point. all the team bar Nepal and Afghans are full of expatriates (i.e. people from sub-continent). If you can not take the game to the natives the status quo would continue. Look what happened to soccer in the USA; till soccer mom arrived it was a foreigners game; now it is the fastest growing game. People of subcontinent would watch the game no matter where the live because this is only game where they are masters of universe
I think the ICC deserves credit for the World Cricket League. The divisional system is excellent - it rewards success, which is crucial at the lower levels, giving an incentive for improvement.
There's some decent teams even at this level though - I'm surprised to the see the US down here, they were ranked in the best 14 or 16 in the world not so long ago. It's not quite clear from the article, but maybe this is a consequence of their suspension from the ICC? Nepal also have beaten test nations at U19 level.
My dark horse: Norway. There is a very decent grass roots infrastructure on the south-east coast of the country, around Oslo and down. They are in by far the tougher of the two groups though - Afghanistan will stroll to the top of Group B I imagine.
No featured comments at the moment.
I think the ICC deserves credit for the World Cricket League. The divisional system is excellent - it rewards success, which is crucial at the lower levels, giving an incentive for improvement.
There's some decent teams even at this level though - I'm surprised to the see the US down here, they were ranked in the best 14 or 16 in the world not so long ago. It's not quite clear from the article, but maybe this is a consequence of their suspension from the ICC? Nepal also have beaten test nations at U19 level.
My dark horse: Norway. There is a very decent grass roots infrastructure on the south-east coast of the country, around Oslo and down. They are in by far the tougher of the two groups though - Afghanistan will stroll to the top of Group B I imagine.
what is the point. all the team bar Nepal and Afghans are full of expatriates (i.e. people from sub-continent). If you can not take the game to the natives the status quo would continue. Look what happened to soccer in the USA; till soccer mom arrived it was a foreigners game; now it is the fastest growing game. People of subcontinent would watch the game no matter where the live because this is only game where they are masters of universe
Shakil, the number or lack of "native" cricketers is a concern. However, I can assure you that these are all Japanese: Irie, Murata, Kobayashi, Miyaji, Kamatani, Chino, Hagihara, Kobayashi, Matsubara, Nakano
In a multicultural society, to divide people into `natives' and `non-natives' is a deeply misguided anachronism. There is nothing wrong with people of subcontinental descent who have moved to and integrated themselves in a different country representing that country. Should Monty Panesar, Nasser Hussain and so on be ineligible for England?! I know for a fact that the Norwegian squad is made up of Norwegians - of subcontinental descent, but Norwegians.
And how do you think the game spread in the first place? By your argument, Shakil, there would never have been cricket anywhere except in England. As with any aspect of culture, there is a natural evolution: cricket is first brought and played by immigrants, and eventually it may grow in popularity.
Like planting seeds, not every country will grow to love cricket. But the more countries play and are encouraged to develop the game, the more places it will take root.
i think that if they are born in the country they play for its fine but if they are foreign born that shouldnt be aloud except if they have lived in the country for a long time and speak the countries language.
i agree its a good idea to have the lesser known countries involved in qualification for the world cup and i think instead of 12 teams it should be 16,but i think the future of some of these countries involved is to stay minnows for life.
i think icc should hand pick countries who might oneday play test cricket like afghanistan and the usa.i dont think vanautu,bahamas or jersey will ever play test cricket.i think countries like fiji and vanuatu should combine into a united pacific islands team and jersey should along with scotland join the english domestic comp.bahamas should join the west indies domestic comp.this frees up qualifing positions.
the sad thing about having 12 teams is one will be ireland thats fine thier a independent country,but the other will be scotland which not a indepedent country at the exspense of future test playing countries.
the icc should focus on countries that will one day play tests like afghanistan,nepal,kenya,usa,holland,china and canada
The 2007 Cricket World Cup final was played in West Indies. Australia vs SriLanka. It was a mess day, with heavy rain. The organizers could have made a reserve day for the match because it was the final. But the match was played with 38 overs and this do not look good for a final. People with so many expectations coming to watch the match need to be satisfied too. Also the prestigious game of 50 overs being not considered on that day by making it just 38 overs. It is also difficult to a team to adopt quickly to such a game, specially when it is the finals. Don't mind who wins the game but, when in situations like this the ICC or the organizers must definitely try to or must keep an extra day.
In cricket AFghanistan is on top now a days in Division 5 and they beat unbeatable teams like Jersy, Nepal Afghanistan is on top and if they supported will beat all the world... Wish them best of luck and success forever.