Reduction of teams in the 2019 world cup

[Red Bear]

Worthy of its own discussion IMO.

I'm not sure there's a worse body at expanding their international footprint than the ICC. The decision the reduce the 2019 world cup to 10 teams is a shocker.

Dave Richardsons attempts to explain it seem pretty pissweak to me.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/story/826327.html
Talking up their pathways, despite the fact that it clearly is far more difficult for associate members to qualify for this world cup.
Then conceding
http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc-cricket-world-cup-2015/content/story/828365.html

Especially if playing and potentially dropping games to these sides threatens your own chances of playing premier events.

Numerous associate members have been attacking the ICC directly for their policy
http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc-cricket-world-cup-2015/content/story/837671.html
http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc-cricket-world-cup-2015/content/story/837477.html

Whilst, despite his media conference not being put up by the ICC, Mahela Jayawardene had this to say

There's also a petition going around on the net to stop them reducing the number of sides.

Now there's a fair argument that the current format is flawed, because it is clearly designed to get the top 8 to qualify, therefor makes the first month or so of cricket pretty academic (eg England are still a decent chanc eof qualifying despite being utterly dreadful, such is the allowances).

personally I'd favour a 16 team competition. Four groups of four. Top two sides from each group qualify for quarter finals and from there it is a straight knock out. Still allows for 31 games, and there can be higher value attached to the games given there is far greater percentage of meaningful competition involved.

 

[WaznTheGreat]

This is a disgrace,the best thing about any WC in any sport is the minnows getting there chance of glory,the minnows have put up a better fight than alot of the top tier nations in this WC too.

West Indies beat Pakistan by 150 runs
India beat South Africa by 130 runs
Australia beat England by 111 runs
NZ beat England by 8 wickets with 8 million balls remaining

 

[undertaker]

And you do remember that this 2015 World Cup was initially going to be 10 teams before a backlash from the Associate Members such as Ireland forced the ICC to change their mind and keep 14:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/story/509530.html
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/current/story/521049.html

I hope common sense prevails and the 2019 and 2023 World Cup's aren't trimmed down to 10 teams. The Associate Members aren't going to improve and develop as cricket nations and the growth of the game internationally will be geniused if they are not given regular opportunities against the test playing nations.

 

[Red Bear]

Another example this evening of what the associates bring to the game

 

[vvvrulz]

Red Bear hit the nail on the head, and where's Locky moaning about his minnow mismatches? lol
The real minnows have been Pakistan and England.

The little guys in this World Cup have really set it alight, they've been fantastic.
My argument that 14 teams is a bit much got debunked as well with UAE excellent again.

Needs to be 12 teams at very minimum, 10 is rubbish.

I'm still not convinced quarter finals are perfect as it promotes a dramatic upset to a team who fired during pool play (Lara vs South Africa 1996). Personally I think 4 pools of 4 as RB said above, Super Eights then Semi Finals + Final could work.

Maybe an NRL type playoffs system with the group leaders getting a week off / second chance?

... I'll think about it more.

 

[JJ]

I think the goal is 3 teams, ultimately - or 3 that join the comp in the semis, and the rest of us play off for the privilege of playing with the big boys...

Aussies will hate it, but the best thing for World cricket is probably that none of the Big 3 win this one, and ideally none of them are in the final

 

[Twizzle]

just the Aussies ?

I think the other 2 might feel the same way as well if it happened

 

[JJ]

just the Aussies ?

I think the other 2 might feel the same way as well if it happened

Mainly Aussies here, and you're the world #1... and Poms thinking they will win are either geniuses or insane... Indians, of course, and they do seem rather focused, Kohli , Vijay and Rahane aside I am not so sure anyone gave about the earlier cricket...

Just saying, someone else winning (esp NZ ) would probably be good for the game...

 

[vvvrulz]

Totally agree, NZ or even SA winning would be great for the game

I think we can safely write off England completely as a threat, and Australia will be put to the test this weekend. India look surprisingly good.

 

[Big Sam]

If you do keep 2 pools of 7 then reduce the KO stage to just semis. But if that's too drastic then why not a pre-semi round where 2nd A/B would play 3rd B/A with the victors to join the pool winners in the semis?

 

[Walt Flanigan]

I think 16 teams works. Hopefully Australia feature in the next World Cup too....

 

[Big Sam]

Another format I thought about for a 15-country CWC is this:

Group Stage (30 matches)
- 3 groups of 5 countries
- top 2 from each group progress to Super Sixes with the group results carrying to that stage

Super Sixes (12 matches)
- 3 results from the Group Stage carry over
- top 4 from Super Sixes go through to semis just like 1999 and 2003

Semis and Final (3 matches)
- self explanatory

45 matches in total.

 

[undertaker]

With Ireland winning last night, I really do hope they make the Quarter-Finals and show up the ICC's farcical decision to reduce the tournament to 10 teams. They are almost certain to qualify if they beat Zimbabwe.

 

[undertaker]

I think 16 teams works. Hopefully Australia feature in the next World Cup too....

I loved the 2007 format, but the ICC will never go back to that.

The 2011/2015 formats was designed to ensure that India and Pakistan made the finals after what happened in 2007 when both teams went out in the first round to upsets (Ireland beat Pakistan, Bangladesh beat India) and as a result, tv ratings were down for the remainder of the tournament (as India and Pakistan have the two largest tv audiences of all the cricketing nations). But I loved that, how one result in the group phase had a large bearing on the outcome of the group. Also, although the Super Eight stage dragged out a bit too long (this could easily be solved with more double headers), it was fair in that every team in that stage played each other of the top 2 from the other groups (like a round robin). This round-robin like structure in the Super Eight ensured that the best teams got through to the semis, and there were no flukey one-off performances that could take you that far.

It was because of 16 teams in that tournament that we got to see this fantastic catch from Bermuda. Love David Lloyd's commentary. "the fridge has opened":lol::

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-fEFjuQecg

As it stands, Pakistan will be battling for a QF spot, especially if one of their remaining matches got rained out.

 

[TheParraboy]

Another example this evening of what the associates bring to the game

5000 crowd?

Look,

I love seeing these nations play, especially when they give the big boys a run for their money. But in the fair dinkum stakes, minnow against minnow is a fairer contest and should deliver a decent game

Aussies will hate it, but the best thing for World cricket is probably that none of the Big 3 win this one, and ideally none of them are in the final

Mainly Aussies here, and you're the world #1... and Poms thinking they will win are either geniuses or insane... Indians, of course, and they do seem rather focused, Kohli , Vijay and Rahane aside I am not so sure anyone gave about the earlier cricket...

Just saying, someone else winning (esp NZ ) would probably be good for the game...

Totally agree, NZ or even SA winning would be great for the game

Depends what perspective your looking at

England , Australia and India are the 3 main income streams from the game (India way out in front)

You have all 3 not make the semis, let alone the final, then it isn't really good for the game (financially) from then on it is sentiment value only (ie never won it before, seen as the underdog etc..)

A warm fuzzy feeling winner would be NZ , cause they have never won it before and are most likely not expected too. Be good for cricket in NZ if they won it.


If Australia don't win it my preference would be NZ.

A SA and India final would bury me

 

[PARRA_FAN]

So the top 8 ODI teams automatically qualify with the last spots up for grabs. Teams 9 and 10 play in a qualifying stage with the minnows.

The minnows could still make it but how embarrassing would it be if a West Indies or Bangladesh miss out.

Also 16 teams in a World Cup is a decent number, but the scheduling should be 4 groups of 4, quarter finals, semi finals, then the final.

 

[undertaker]

Here's another World Cup format I'd like to propose (and will be interested to hear your thoughts on this) for maybe 2023 or 2027WC:

If the ICC is focused on achieving a similar number of matches to the current format (49 games), the Rugby World Cup one is something I'd love to see in the future:

- 20 teams
- 4 groups of 5
- top 2 from each group going through to the Quarter-Finals
- 47 games in total (getting rid of the third-place playoff match that the Rugby World Cup has).
- The quarter-finalists are the only teams that automatically qualify for the next World Cup, other spots have to be achieved via a qualification process over the following 4 years.

20 teams would mean more Associate Members, and fans from more countries at the event. Yes, there may be some blowout results, but the matches between the Associate Members would also be very close.

 

[PARRA_FAN]

20 teams ? Wow

In the long term I can probably see that happening.

So apart from the current teams, you could probably have Canada, Netherlands, Kenya, PNG, Hong Kong, Bermuda, or even other cricketing nations.

I think you'll find that the 2023 CWC hosted by India will only have the 10 teams, unless they change their mind. But 2027 CWC might be considered.

 

[undertaker]

20 teams ? Wow

In the long term I can probably see that happening.

So apart from the current teams, you could probably have Canada, Netherlands, Kenya, PNG, Hong Kong, Bermuda, or even other cricketing nations.

I think you'll find that the 2023 CWC hosted by India will only have the 10 teams, unless they change their mind. But 2027 CWC might be considered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Cricket_World_Cup_Qualifier

Based on that link, Hong Kong, PNG, Kenya, Namibia, Netherlands and Canada would be the next 6 teams in line after UAE and Scotland qualified. They would've been a good addition to this tournament.

Regarding smaller venues, interestingly Mackay, Ballarat, Berri and Albury hosted matches in the '92WC, but neither of those grounds would meet ICC requirements today.

 

[Mr Angry]

As long as I see the Afghanis again......love them.

They clearly love to play and have given me joy.