Pietersen: Just not up for it

The only thing that’s certain when one of cricket’s top teams plays Bangladesh is that Bangladesh will lose – unless it rains. The questions I want to try and answer here are – what’s the point in a team as poor as Bangladesh even playing in these Test matches and what’s the point in the better teams playing Bangladesh? Who learns anything?

Geoffrey Boycott was asking the same questions on Test Match Special after the first Test at Lords. He came to the conclusion that it can’t be good for an emerging nation to continually lose at Test level. I agree. Bangladesh, obviously, don’t.

Yet it must damage confidence, will, desire and just puts an air of negativity amongst the players. There will always be the argument that testing yourself against your betters allows you to grow and improve and that is true to an extent. But surely you have to have a hope of inflicting defeat on your opponent for that to be the case.

For Bangladesh, playing against the likes of England and Australia is counter-productive. It’s a test, sure, but only of their player’s will to continue turning out for their nation.

And what of the better team? Today saw the start of the second Test between England and Bangladesh at Old Trafford – what will England get out of it? You would perhaps think that a chance to really swing the bat and rack up a huge score would inspire, but it’s the opposite. Just look at Kevin Pietersen for example. He can hardly be bothered playing.

Far from allowing the batsmen and bowlers to expand on their skills it deadens them. There is no challenge, no risk, no fear of defeat. And so they become lazy. Witness the morning session today – Strauss and Trott gone in just four balls. Why? They simply did not bring their A game. Credit must go to the Bangladesh bowlers, of course, they did their jobs well. But I believe England allowed them to do so by simply not being ‘up for it’.

It is hardly worthy preparation for an Ashes series Down Under either.

Mr Boycott’s suggestion that Bangladesh should not be troubing the international elite but should instead by facing County sides around the world until they are more prepared to handle the rigours of the full Test arena. It’s not a bad idea, but it’s not the money spinner that various cricket boards would want. Ah, money again. Always crops up doesn’t it.

A better idea would be to create a second tier of international sides. Bangladesh, Zimbabwe (when possible), Ireland, Scotland all battling it out for promotion to full Test status for the following 12 months perhaps. It has its flaws but could be worth a try to help the lesser nations find their feet within the game.

Given enough time, of course, Bangladesh could establish themselves as a serious cricketing nation. As could Ireland, Scotland et al. But why not help them along the way with a better structured international set up. Just a thought…

Do you agree or disagree? Let us know in the comments.