Home
> Cricket Development > News: Its happenning….
News: Its happenning….
The ICC is one signature off from cutting the number of teams by 2 in the next world cup…… in addition to that, the suggested format is one crappy one, with a team making winning all games at the same level as the team beating only the associates (plus Ban and Zim)!
In 1996, I remember that SA were unbeaten in 1 pool, while WI, barely made it through after losing to even Kenya….. in the qtr final, WI beat SA….. that was SA’s “one bad day”…… there was some discussion about this format being not the best, and the ICC went forward with a newer format where the first round was not as “predictable”
But I guess, now we want the predictability back……
Categories: Cricket Development
mopase
Nasir M. Khan
Nishadh Rego
Nasir M. Khan\'s Cricket blog 
With every recent decision the ICC has made it has ensured the game played at less than the ‘elite’ level is either further degraded or just not effectively thought about.
I am also a little confused about the ODI status for the top 6 now….. the last time 6 countries got this status, the argument was that if they are good enough to play ODIs in the world cup, then why not otherwise…… now, with only 4 teams qualifying, will ODI status go to only 4 of them? will that mean more ODIs for them or less? I mean Kenya has played a lot of ODIs with Canada and Bermuda last year; if there was no status for them, then Kenya would have basically played only 2-3 ODIs in 2007 outside of the WC and WCQS……..
Nasir, the more I look at these things the more I become totally confused. I am beginning to believe my friends in the ICC when they tell me that more time is spent discussing which 5 star hotel to stay at and which is the most comfortable seat in the front of the aircraft than on cricket issues for real cricket.
It is almost sure that ICC wants to reduce in number of qualifiers from ICC Trophy.
Here I want to prefer that they should cut 2 more places of last ranked full members and send them to fight in ICC Trophy and qualify.
Cutting places for qualifier wont be fair enough, where an associate member Ireland is ranked above than a full members. It means, the last ranked team are also good enough and should go through qualification round. It may gives more competitive teams for the World Cup.
The equation should be 8 full members + 6 Qualifier = 14 Teams
It may give Associates teams some satisfaction over getting less places and ask to fight to go through to World Cup.
Art
This wasn’t a decision made by the ICC.
My understanding is the neutral executives wanted the associates to stay.
The Chief Executive committee is made up of men representing the 10 full members and that is why the vote went against the associates.
And yes, the full member executives hold the balance of power, so all they have to do is get 7 of them to vote no. Simple!
So I warm thank you (NOT) to the following
James Sutherland (Australia)
David Collier (England)
Niranjan Shah (India)
Justin Vaughan (NZ)
Shafqat Naghmi (Pakistan)
Duleep Mendis (Sri Lanka)
Gerald Majola (South Africa)
Donald Peters (West Indies)
Ozias Bvute (Zimbabwe)
and a special mention to Mr TBA from Bangladesh.
I’m going to try and find out who voted yes and post it.
Zimbabwe voted that associates lessen the intensity of the tournament because they are too weak?
ahem….
This is absurd and unfair. In fact rather than reward associates for performing well against top sides, we punish them b/c they create upsets and bundle these so called top sides out of the WC…so much for global expansion. This is ridiculous. What chance do aspiring nations have now? none.
This is going back to the Imperial Cricket Council, just that it’s now the Indian Cricket Council.
What’s with Quarter-Finals anyway? Wasn’t the point of trimming the WC down to two groups of seven to prevent the possibility of being eliminated after having a bad day?
Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe have some nerve voting against us. I hope the four associates who do make the WC make us proud, and I kinda hope the WC will be a failure in terms of crowds and that. Oh yeah, and that India and Pakistan get eliminated in the first round, so we have a different format come 2015 in which beating India is against the law.
Its sad the excuses being used to further discourage the plaing of proper cricket outside certain realms. If the ICC is so keen to reach a situation where the same pampered nations are monopolising success and revenue on the global stage then it shows just how much their hearts are not really in the right place. By saying that Ireland and Bangladesh were responsible for the poor quality of cricket in the 2007 World Cup they are admitting that these two as well as the rest of the non-test cricketing world are not expected or intended to play good enough cricket to disturb the status quo.
Andy, it’s more a case of the ICC being strongarmed by the BCCI and their allies, what has happened is that the BCCI has built itself an alliance with enough boards to basically win whatever matters come down to voting, thereby creating a faux democracy. The BCCI doesn’t see the associates as being of much advertising revenue and stadium filling value so they’ve looked to axe a couple.
I suspect that there was some kind of deal where the ICC agreed to reduce the number of associates for the 2011 WC only, I wouldn’t be surprised the the number of associates is re-raised to 6 (or possibly higher) after the 2011 WC is over.
Don’t bet on it Cuen.
The next World Cup is co-hosted by Australia and their disdain of associates is well known.
In fact, I reckon Australia might push for a further reduction.
i dont c any problem with 2 groups of 8 and then the knock-outs in a world cup, would mean only 63 games & take only 5-6 days more than what the 2011 wc will take now. and the ipl is 44 days long, already too long a tournament with too many meaningless games, the 2011 wc will be shorter than ipl with 16 teams & 63 matches even
Amit, you may not see a problem with it (and neither do I), but all those who complained about the length of the previous 2 WCs (and will probably complain about the length of this one too since it is only 9 days shorter) will definitely not like the extra 5-6 days.
On the face of it, there will probably never be a format that is pleasing to all (or even most) in any sport, since even today some people call for a reduction in the number of teams in the Rugby World Cup and see very minor teams in the Football World Cup as little more than fluff to make up numbers.For tournaments in a game like cricket there should be a balance between quality (the best teams making it to the top) and length (not taking forever to determine the best teams). Unfortunately that balance (if found) will probably suit no one since it wouldn’t be long enough (for those wishing to see the absolute best make it) and at the same time it would be too long (for those just wanting to see near meaningless competiton where teams advance as much by chance as by ability).
If the format used for the first World Twenty20 (which was only a small yet significant modification of the 2007 WC format) were to be used for 2011 then we would have 16 teams competing in two rounds of round-robin followed by two stages of knockout and it would all be over in 27-34 days with only 39 matches (a significant reduction of 12 matches and 12-19 days). Anybody griping about the length of the tournament after such a reduction would probably be harking back to the now unrealistic 2 or so weeks of the initial WC.
been, the disdain of associates by australia is mainly on the cricket field, they want to win their matches against associates by as big as possible, but they seem to have a policy of supporting the underdog, looks like they wont mind a 16 team world cup in 2015
I hope your right, because that is definitely not the impression I get when some Australians decide to comment in the media on the associates or even Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. And I couldn’t tell it either when it comes to Australia’s avoidance of test matches with Bangladesh and matches in general with Zimbabwe.
I think this is a classic case of where a governing body does not understand the wants of the population. Since the announcement regarding the number of teams dropping, the only things i have heard from members of the PUBLIC in Australia is disgust and disappointment. Almost all refer to Ireland’s run as one of the best things out of a poor World Cup (often mentioned before Australia winning it if you ask ‘what was the best part of the last WC).
What you hear from members of the mainstream PRESS and CRICKET AUSTRALIA is somewhat different and unfortunately it is the latter that make the decisions.
The ICC gets a huge chunk of its income from media houses controlled by a certain Rupert Murdoch, who in turn dominate the broadcasting rights of nearly all meaningful cricket so it goes without saying the viewpoint expressed in their papers is one that is closely tied to the wants of their biggest consumers
Nasir,
Just wanted to check up on what was happening with the slight decrease in new material over the last couple of weeks to a month..
I take it you must be busy at work etc.
Would be good to have a couple of opinions on the U-15 tournament happening and the upcoming WCL Div. 5..
Apparently in the 2009 WC qualifier, the top six will still get ODI/T20I status even though only the top four will actually play in the WC.
Can anyone confirm this?
If this is true (& I’m sure it is), it is a consolation for the two that miss out I suppose & also still an incentive for the associate/affiliate world.
What do others think?