Minnows, are they good for the game or do they take the competitiveness out of the major tournaments they’ve been playing in? It’s a question which has divided cricket circles for some years; and the circle still looks in divide over it. People often express their views supporting them with comments such as “there good for the game” and “it gives them good experience”. On the other hand peoples views argue that “they lower the standard of the game”. When Minnows were first introduced into World Cricket I’m sure there purpose was not to lower the standard of cricket; I’m fairly sure it was to broaden the horizons of cricket in other areas of the world and to give those countries national side the experience of playing against some of the best players in the world. But the question is are these countries cricketing horizons being made broader and are their national sides improving from the experience?

I’ve not written this article with a purpose to solve this dilemma once and for all. I’ve written it to try and dissect (not literally) the whole purpose of this argument. We’ve seen success stories emerge from the minnow nations. In the 2007 World Cup Ireland showed that the minnows do have a place in international cricket; in the 2003 World Cup Kenya proved the same point by reaching the semi finals and beat Sri Lanka in the quarter finals. But countries have also made the points of those negative about minnow sides seem correct. One of the things that needs to be taken into account is whether teams are being rushed into playing in these competitions and maybe more importantly rushed into given test status. Maybe getting the opinions of the test sides would be a good idea after all their the one’s who will be playing against them. The minnows do need experience but they shouldn’t be lowering the standard while doing it. The bottom line is, well I don’t think there is one. The whole minnow argument will go on for a long time until some sort of agreement is made.