ICC Intercontinental Cup and Shield

seventeen in the match. Over the first tournament as a whole, however, these fears proved unfounded. Many of the matches were evenly contested with six out of the fifteen games ending in draws, and all apart from the final lasting three days. Whether after seven years the tournament has justified its first-class status depends in part on what it is compared with. Should the matches be treated as the nearest equivalent to Test matches for these Associate and Affiliate countries or is a comparison with the English County Championship, Australia’s state domestic competition or India’s Ranji Trophy more appropriate? There is, of course, no clear definition of what constitutes first-class. There are considerable differences in standard between the domestic teams in virtually all the Full-Member countries, for example between the English county champion and the teams at the bottom of the County Championship Division 2 or between the Ranji Trophy champion and the teams in the Ranji Trophy’s Plate competition. Certainly the statistics of the Intercontinental Cup and Shield show that, like the first-class competitions in the Full-Member countries, the matches have covered the whole gamut of cricketing possibilities from high team and individual scores to low ones, close finishes to completely one-sided outcomes, and some excellent bowling, fielding and wicketkeeping performances. Since the competition was changed from one of geographical groupings to an all-play-all league, it has been more closely fought with uncertainty over which two countries would contest the final until the league’s closing stages. Against these positive aspects, the finals have all been one-sided, the closest being a win by six wickets. The one Intercontinental Shield final was also a six-wicket outcome. These have certainly not been an advert for high quality closely-fought cricket. In the first two years, the participating countries included the United States, Nepal, Malaysia and the Cayman Islands, all of which are far from being among the top Associate countries. The United States has never reached higher than Division 3 of the World Cricket League, Nepal lies in Division 4, Malaysia in Division 6 and the Cayman Islands have fallen from Division 3 in 2007 to Division 5 in 2009. Although the World Cricket League is a 50-over one-day competition and therefore a different style of cricket to the multi-day Intercontinental Cup and Shield, the relative rankings of the countries are probably broadly correct, particularly as, unlike the situation with the Full-Member countries, the same cricketers play for their country in both forms of the game. It is perhaps questionable whether these countries are really of first-class standing. However, as indicated earlier, the ICC was quick to recognise that the standard of cricket was not the same in each of the regional groups and that the country finishing second in the European group and therefore not qualifying for the semi-final might be stronger than some of countries reaching the semi-finals by winning the other groups. This is why, after two tournaments, the regional groups were abandoned and the number of countries in the competition reduced. Another way of judging whether the participating countries are first-class is to examine their performances in multi-day cricket against first-class sides of the Full-Member countries. Unfortunately, so few such fixtures have been played that a comparison is scarcely possible. Kenya lost heavily to Gujarat and Baroda in multi-day matches in August 2010 and to the Pakistan Cricket Academy in September 2008 but they did beat Zimbabwe A in two matches in October 2005. On a more supportive note, Ireland drew a three-day match with Jamaica in April 2010 and Namibia have shown that they are of similar standard to the weaker South African provincial teams in the CSA Provincial Three-Day Challenge competition. The performances of Afghanistan and Ireland against the Zimbabwe XI in the 2009-10 Intercontinental Cup are also instructive since the Zimbabwean teams would clearly rank as first-class. The failure of most of the participating countries to field their strongest teams because of work or other cricket commitments of their players further brings into question the competition’s first-class status. Particularly relevant here is the number of players of the highest quality who have elected to play first-class cricket for other teams rather than represent their country at international level. Whilst it is possible to understand their reasons, it could be argued that giving a higher priority to the first-class domestic game of the Full-Member countries downgrades the status of the Intercontinental Cup and Shield. There are now nine Irish cricketers who have played in the Intercontinental Cup who have contracts with English counties, a clear recognition 7 Introduction