To Associate, or not to

Not so long ago, when the Bangabandhu in Dhaka was the only international venue in the country, Bangladesh, on the back of that infamous victory against Pakistan, was warmed into Test cricket. An entire nation came together to watch its cricketers in white flannels, for the first time ever. For five days, people turned up to work in that iconic building adjacent to the ground, just to witness the action.

Ten years on, the same ground has given ODI cricket back its life, with an opening ceremony like no other. Not the most extravagant, but certainly not short on passion and warmth. For a nation that rose up the ranks through what was once the ICC trophy, it was payback time.

Bangladesh as a team still have a long way to go, but the Full member status has convinced a football-crazy population that they can compete with the best as well as their subcontinental neighbours. The rewards of having given them time and space to grow are there for the world to see. Today, they have an allrounder who can rival the world’s best and victories against higher-ranked teams are no more “giant-killing acts”.

Yes, ODI World Cups are long, produce one-sided games and attract lesser revenues than the whambang T20 ones. But, for a sport which thrives on internationals, unlike football, is it such a bad idea to give the best of these second-tier teams a place in what, ironically, the ICC has labelled “the cup that counts”?

Certainly, no Associate nation has cried out for a place among cricket’s elite since then. Ireland and Kenya have come close, with appearances in the knockout stages of the World Cup. Sport makes things happen like nothing else can. Every time an Ireland beats a Pakistan, the aftermath in the underdog nation is so profound. It encourages an entire generation to take up the sport, gives administrators a reason to promote the game and inspires the populace in more ways than one.

Take India for example. If not for Kapil’s devils, one-day cricket in India might never have been what it is today. There are enough examples in history to tell the ICC that denying Associates an opportunity to compete is a folly, no less. While on one hand, Test cricket has received a facelift through the newly announced World championship, increasing the number of teams in the World Twenty20 only shows the ICC as an organisation lacking in clarity and focus. The latter move has further reduced the chances, if ever there were any, of an Associate nation gaining entry into what is the Holy Grail of cricket- the Test championship. Whether it will increase the competitiveness of the Associate league as these teams vie for fewer slots in the World Cup remains to be seen.

T20 cricket is a double-edged sword. While the format provides room for a greater number of upsets, it brings down drastically the Associates' chances of taking their cricket to the next level. Denying them the incentive of competing in ODIs, is like inviting guests to a luncheon, serving appetisers and sending them off. If cricket’s apex body is genuinely concerned about spreading the game and improving its quality among the “lesser” nations, it must rethink its decision.

Quality might not improve overnight that way, but it at least gives such teams an opportunity, a small window into the intensely competitive world of Test-playing nations. With cash-rich T20 leagues attracting the same set of players over and over, cricket seems to be creating a shell for itself, a protective sheath into which the rest of the world should not dare to enter. Incentives like a World Cup slot can go a long way in expanding the game. After all, what better advertisement can the game have than a Ryan ten Doeschate hundred?