Ireland and Afghanistan become the first new Test nations in 17 years

By T.W.

TEST cricket, a game played between nations over five days, is often thought to be a conservative sport. That is a myth: throughout its 140-year history, the format has constantly evolved. Until five days became the standard format, matches were played over three, four, five or six days; “timeless” Tests were played until a positive result was reached. Overs have been both six and eight balls long, delivered by players bowling overarm or underarm, on both covered and uncovered pitches. Since 2015, some Tests have even been played under floodlights with a pink ball.

But in one regard, Test cricket’s imperviousness to change is indisputable: the number of countries permitted to play. In most sports, any country has a chance to take part. Over 200 countries have played full football internationals. More than 100 have competed in full rugby internationals; almost as many have played full basketball internationals. Cricket has taken a very different approach. Only ten countries have ever played Test cricket. Elevation to the highest form of the game is viewed as a privilege that must be earned, as if the format would be belittled, and the sanctimony of statistics damaged, by adopting an inclusive approach.

Like many exclusive clubs, there has been no shortage of aspirants. But expansion has occurred at a soporific pace. The most recent new country to play a Test match was Bangladesh, in 2000. So this week’s announcement that Afghanistan and Ireland have been awarded Test status and voted in as full members of the International Cricket Council (ICC), the game’s governing body, qualifies as momentous. They will probably play their first Test matches in 2018.

Both countries have overcome tremendous obstacles. In Ireland, cricket was popular in the 19th century, but became victim to the growing Irish nationalist movement. The game was attacked as being “English”. In 1901, the Gaelic Athletic Association prohibited the playing, or even watching, of cricket. The ban lasted until 1971. Cricket remained a fringe sport in Northern Ireland and was confined to small pockets in the Republic, particularly in private schools. The association with England stuck. The IRA, a Republican terrorist group, occasionally dug up cricket pitches. As recently as 2002 an Ireland fixture was halted because players refused to play while the ground, in Belfast, flew the Union Jack.

Irish cricket was reborn thanks to a booming economy. In the early 2000s the “Celtic Tiger” lured a wave of immigrants to the country, many from cricket hotbeds such as Australia, South Africa and South Asia. The significance was three-pronged. First, it enhanced playing standards and numbers, especially in Dublin. Second, it eroded the lingering image of cricket as a game for “West Brits”. Lastly, it boosted the national team. Four members of the side who defeated Pakistan in Ireland’s inaugural World Cup, in 2007, were born overseas. Ireland has since become the most successful non-Test nation of all time, beating five Test-playing countries in the past three World Cups. That is despite losing three senior players to England (two of whom later switched their allegiance back to Ireland, including Ed Joyce, the brother of The Economist’s international editor). Success has helped to raise interest in the game further. Participation levels have quadrupled in the last decade and the side has now shed its former dependence on cricketers born overseas.

Afghanistan’s story, meanwhile, is among the most extraordinary in international sport this century. Cricket first took hold among Afghan refugees who had fled the Afghan-Soviet War to Pakistan during the 1980s. They played with tennis balls or, if these could not be located, sticks and plastic bags wrapped up to make balls. The governing body for cricket in Afghanistan was founded in 1995 by a returning refugee, and the sport gained support among the Taliban, both because of its conservative dress code and its association with Pakistan. The group encouraged Afghanistan to make a bid to join the ICC in 2001, shortly before the American invasion of the country.

In 2004, a team largely made up of refugees who had learned the game in Pakistan played its first official international match. With support from charities and foreign governments eager to support a good news story in the country—Germany pledged €700,000 ($783,000) for the construction of a new stadium in 2014—Afghanistan built the facilities to support the team on their rise through international cricket. They qualified for their first World Twenty20 in 2010, and played in their first World Cup in 2015. The side is currently Afghanistan’s most successful sports team, and cricket is probably the country's most popular sport. Some domestic matches have attracted sell-out crowds of 13,000 in Kabul, although the security situation means that international matches must be played in India or the UAE.

How will the pair get on? Test cricket is an immensely tactical game, and new Test teams initially tend to find the going tough. Only one side, Australia in the very first Test match in 1877, has ever won their first game. Most had to wait much longer. India’s first victory came in their 25th Test, after 20 years as a Test nation. New Zealand’s came in their 45th Test, after 26 years. Most recently it took Bangladesh 35 Tests until their first victory, against a beleaguered Zimbabwe side. In their first 50 Tests against opponents other than Zimbabwe, Bangladesh lost 47 and drew three—two of which were thanks to inclement weather shortening the game.

In many ways both Afghanistan and Ireland are better prepared than Bangladesh was. Bangladesh only introduced a domestic multi-day competition a year before its Test debut. Ireland has had such a competition since 2013 and Afghanistan since 2014. What is more, many Irish players have already played English county cricket. Both Afghanistan and Ireland also compete in the Intercontinental Cup, an ICC competition for non-Test nations.

The danger is that the two new sides will become Test nations in name only. Zimbabwe, currently the lowest-ranked Test nation will receive $94m in ICC funding from 2016-23. Afghanistan and Ireland will receive just $40m each. That will both hamper their ability to be competitive on the field and to organise games; it is common for boards hosting Test matches to lose $500,000 a match (often they are loss leaders in lieu of playing games against more lucrative opponents, such as England and India). Initially, Afghanistan and Ireland are likely to play around four Tests a year each, significantly fewer than most teams. Even though the ICC is trying to introduce a new league structure for Test cricket, running from 2019-23, Afghanistan and Ireland (like Zimbabwe) will be excluded, at least initially.

Afghanistan’s prospects are probably the brighter of the two. The side boasts a formidable array of bowlers, including Rashid Khan, a brilliant leg-spinner. It also has a huge playing pool. Just as importantly, it will enjoy the greater financial clout. Not only does it receive funding from foreign governments, but it can also make the grant it receives from the ICC go further, because of a lower cost of living.

That means that the Afghan cricket board can already afford to fund 190 centrally contracted cricketers. Ireland, in comparison, has just 19. The Irish team is less strong than five years ago and has failed to regenerate. Even so, with extra cash from the ICC it can spend more money on development programmes. And with Test status, the sport might get greater government support. A higher profile could also stop cricketers leaving to play for England and encourage players with Irish ancestry in other countries, like Australia, to try to play for Ireland.

With the elevation of Ireland and Afghanistan, few other countries currently have a compelling case to follow them into the exclusive club. Scotland, a leading Associate nation, and Nepal, which is the 18th-ranked ICC side but has a fanatical interest in the sport, are perhaps the two most likely entrants in the future, although there is no prospect of this happening until well into the 2020s. That is partly a reflection of Test cricket's quirks but, above all, an indictment of cricket's approach to expansionism: Zimbabwe receive seven times as much ICC funding as Scotland despite having an atrocious playing record and chaotic administration. If Test cricket is to grow further the sport needs long-term thinking and far greater willingness to share its considerable wealth.