Back in 2000, the ICC battled to convince the rest of their members that perhaps Bangladesh were more deserving than Kenya and Scotland for Test status, while Holland needed to lift their internal level of competition. Then we were told, that Bangladesh were ‘deservingly first in the queue’; other need to wait a little longer for such recognition.Today, if we take nations such as Scotland, Holland and even Kenya, wracked as it was by serious internal corruption that led to a government takeover, the game at the second level of the international scale is in need of a serious rethink.There are more players in Scotland than there are in Kenya and Zimbabwe combined: one has Test, status the other does not.And when the team’s coach has a serious (physical) falling-out with one of the players over a question of discipline, questions are again asked about how important is international status. If it is performance-related, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, resting as they are on the bottom rungs of the Test ladder, have a credibility problems as well as players who, in many cases wouldn’t earn selection in a serious first-class side.Yet when we look as Zimbabwe even four years ago, when they often offered a serious challenge, the current crop have been serious affected by selection and administrative policies that has sapped confidence and decimated talent. Rebuilding it is another matter.If we take Scotland and Holland as examples, where traditions and a cricket culture run deep, the ICC’s programme to recognise just causes may seem slow moving, even by their ponderous standards. Yet the Intercontinental Cup does suggest the game is moving forward. And both have qualified for CWC07.This being the case, revisiting the proposed ICC Senior and Groups A and B plan as a way to uplift the game and improve standards does have its advantages. What it does mean is a change in Test status. You still have the senior (or elite) group of eight.A Group will then consist of Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Holland, Scotland, Kenya and the United Arab Emirates, with additional Test status granted to the latter four. The difference being that the letter A is affixed to indicate Group A teams Tests. Current Test records will be retained by both Zimbabwe and Bangladesh and can at some stage be brought back into the system.Yet, if the ICC are serious about their programme of developing teams, the group mentioned has a proven record at this level and CWC level. It may mean than the ICC need to introduce a new category, and there is nothing wrong with that either. Test Administrative has a better ring about it and gives a form of authenticity than Associate Member.Current standings at the ICC Intercontinental Cup programme gives some indication of which team is performing. Holland are bottom of their pool, headed by Ireland, and Scotland second. Yet if we take the long-term view, Holland’s record is more consistent that that of Ireland, where the game has limped along through a lack of serious input by the England and Wales Cricket Board.It has been largely left to the ICC’s European officer, based at Lord’s as part of the ICC, to help oversee the growth of such countries as Scotland, Ireland and Holland. Generally, there is more help coming from South Africa (for Holland) where the Dutch have an academy in Cape Town. There are other outside sources who act as benefactors for Scotland and Ireland, but the ECB are not one of them.In this the ICC need to be seen to be proactive. Creating a second Test level would at least protect the product and take the two teams in the firing line out of the equation.
