More matches against the associates

[r@ndom]

In light of the New Zealand tour and also the fact that Bangladesh are soon to be visiting europe to play non-test playing nations [Scotland, Ireland and the Netherleands i think] should Zimbabwe be trying to do the same or would a series against a weak Kenya team or a team like Afghanistan for instance be a backward step? The home series Zim had with NZ, Pakistan and Bangladesh as the reintroduction to test cricket were a success I would say but I feel there is still room for series against the associates, even if them winning some matches would lead to the media getting the knives out.

[ZIMDOGGY]

we need to play more west indies type nations,

we wont ever improve playing scotland...who are as strong as mashonaland

[Jemisi]

The associate games muddy the waters for us, it will help the nearly teams, and we should do a bit of it, but we need to be playing more up than down.

[Boundary]

Our A side should play against the senior Associate countries. I thought that run in the intercontinental cup was fantastic. Our A side standard should be at the Ireland/Netherlands/Afghanistan level, otherwise we are in trouble. Next year we are playing tests against Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Bangladesh. We should play those and NZ and WI as often as possible, with one offs against the neighbours just to gauge our progress. If we win 50% of our matches against this group, then we'll be a legitimate test nation with no fear of any journalist's knives.

[eugene]

I think our A side should play Ireland fairly frequently, along with Namibia and Kenya to help develop African cricket.

[sloandog]

I believe Namibia have a very good side now days, they nearly got through to the world T20 this year i think. And, in addition, they have a solid under 19's side

[lloydwinini]

Rily gents??? i cant believe you wud even think about playing down, even our A team Should play A teams from other test playing nations. The stiffer competion you get the better you become. Whats the use of playing Scotland wen they wudnt even agree to play in Zim last year. Bsyds it would be a practice match fo our A team. All im saying is that in order to spot real talent we need to see who will perform as an under dog, after all thats what we are in our league

[maehara]

Rily gents??? i cant believe you wud even think about playing down, even our A team Should play A teams from other test playing nations. The stiffer competion you get the better you become.

Show me a Test nation who'd play us at 'A' level. They're few and far between. Playing Associates is better than not playing at all - and it doesn't do any harm to keep the Associates sweet.

That said, it's kind of moot when we can barely afford to host a tour of any description at the moment.

[foreignfield]

That said, it's kind of moot when we can barely afford to host a tour of any description at the moment.

True enough, but I wouldn't mind an away tour during the European summer, all expenses paid. The way our guys struggled in slightly alien conditions in NZ suggests that a visit to Dublin, Glasgow or the Hague would not be amiss.

[ZIMDOGGY]

like lloyd be sayin, our full team playing associates is a waste of resources and is akin to a teenager doing a p*ss on a kids face. no point.

i see merit (if viable) of an A squad or an under 19 squad playing an associate team.

But there is no use in our guys getting accustomed to belting 50s of bowling that is the same standard of southern rocks.

would anyone here think zimbabwe v Southern Rocks is a good matchup?

didnt think so.

better of zimbabwe v nz A or something. we need to strengthen our skills against fast bowling, swing bowling etc -
or we will always always always get situations like the 2011 WC where our players couldnt clearly handle the extra zip in pace or the extra zag in spin.