Quote from: bryant.coleman on Today at 05:21:12 PM

Quote from: JSRAW on Today at 05:06:36 PM

If every board started thinking like that then there would be no international cricket. Only BIG 3 and couple of more nations would play dandiya with each other every now and then.

Having said that i am in favor of quadrilateral and trilateral series instead of bilateral. One sided or not, doesn't matter as long as its helping with the scheduling.

But why Zimbabwe, when there are more deserving sides out there? Why India and the other big 3 nations need to play against Zimbabwe, when they never give that opportunity to the smaller teams. If the BCCI can organize a tour of 3 T20Is and 3 ODIs against Zimbabwe, then why can't they give just one game to Nepal, Kenya or Papua New Guinea? Even that one game would be life changer for these countries.

The last time India has played against Kenya was in 2004. And India have never played against Nepal or PNG. On the other hand, India and Zimbabwe have played against each other in ODI a total of 63 times.

What makes those 3 cricketing nations more deserving than Zimbabwe? They all looks same to me as far as performance goes, Zim arguably comes at top when comparing them.

And again its not BCCI job to entertain every associate members.