This is a question that has been floating around for several years: should Ireland be given Test status? There are no guaranteed parameters for Test status. South Africa's first Tests were not assigned as such until many years after they were played. Bangladesh gained Test status after only three ODI wins - two against sides that did not play Test cricket. The fact that they had lost 27 matches against Test nations before the last of those three wins did not matter, and nor apparently did the fact that they lost their next 45 completed matches until a solitary win by eight runs against Zimbabwe, 18 years on from their inaugural appearance.

Ireland have played 33 completed ODIs against Test-quality opposition so far, won five of them and tied one. At the same stage in their development, Zimbabwe had won two and tied one, so Ireland have outperformed the two most recently promoted teams.

In the last three years they have been defeated just three times in ODIs by their fellow Associates and Affiliates, and are well ahead of the chasing pack. In the longer form of the game, Ireland have been consistently bagging solid results, despite the fact that they often have to do without their stronger players who are on county duty. Clearly, the quality of the cricketers being produced by the emerald isle is not a problem.

The next argument against Ireland's elevation is lack of suitable stadia. Ireland currently host their home matches at Stormont in Belfast and Clontarf in Dublin. Both stadia boast a capacity of over 5,000 spectators for internationals, but the jewel in the crown is currently under construction in Malahide. The new stadium, fondly named 'The Village', is planned to have a capacity of over 10,000 and will be ready to host England as soon as September next year. Once The Village has been completed, Ireland will be able to spread their fixtures between three top quality venues.

Finally, and most significantly, Ireland has no domestic first-class structure in place. This is both easily remedied and easily overlooked. Ireland's chief executive, Warren Deutrom has outlined a plan to establish a provincial first-class structure, although the plans are currently embryonic. A quicker plan to implement might be to establish three Irish teams, and to invite the Dutch and Scottish A teams to bolster numbers. Ireland would then be able to implement a five-team domestic structure along the lines of the one in Zimbabwe. It should also be noted that Bangladesh received their Test status before their first-class competition was properly established. Only in the season following their first Test match, did the National Cricket League become a first-class competition.

All of these plans could be implemented as soon as next year, with the completion of the Malahide stadium. If the Irish team gets the dozen ODIs they want to play against Full Members, then they can build up to Test status, which could be granted in 2013 or 2014, and would reward the hard work and firm organisation shown by Cricket Ireland since they burst onto the scene in 2007.

And if they take time to find their feet, stick with them. Every team in history has struggled with the step up to Test cricket.

England are currently ranked No. 1 in Test cricket, and are facing the prospect of a series against their closest rivals on the points table, South Africa. The nucleus around which Andy Flower's team has built their success is consistency: they always give a player a decent run in the side and rarely make changes to the make-up of the team from match to match. The other element that has contributed to England's fairytale run is their depth. They could probably select a second XI that would be among the top five teams in the world, and certainly possess stronger bowling than Sri Lanka's worryingly toothless reserves and stronger batting that West Indies.

The beauty of the England team is that there are always ten names – or thereabouts – inked in on the team sheet. Their top five of Strauss (batting rank: 23), Cook (6), Trott (16), Pietersen (17) and Bell (18) runs rampant on home turf, ably backed up by keeper Matt Prior (26) who scores fast runs down the order. To put the potency of this batting line-up into perspective, the top five are ranked above India’s Virender Sehwag, and all six are ranked above Shane Watson.

The other four names who are ever-present comprise the four-pronged bowling attack of Anderson (bowling rank: 3), Swann (joint 4th), Broad (6) and Bresnan (15) – the most potent all-round attack in the world. In addition to this, Bresnan, Broad and Swann are allrounders in their own right, ranked well inside the top 100 Test batsmen and above current West Indies opener Kieran Powell.

The only question mark is who should be the eleventh name on the sheet. Currently, England are experimenting with the raw talent of Jonny Bairstow, with Ravi Bopara and James Taylor waiting in the wings. But does the place have to be filled by a batsman? Steven Finn's performances in coloured clothing in the winter earmarked him not only as one of the leading fast bowlers in England, but also the world. His fast and unerring bowling was a beacon of hope amongst the general mediocrity of the ODI team. His addition would push Bresnan to No. 7, Broad up to 8, and Swann to 9.

It would also leave England playing with only six specialist batsmen, mere months after their seven specialist batsmen wilted in the desert against Pakistan. In those Tests, the three lower-order batsmen were as successful as many of the top order.

However, in home conditions, certainly, the inclusion of a bowler, not a batsman in the spot left vacant by Eoin Morgan, and earlier by Paul Collingwood, may be the best way to go.