Jump to content

BCCI will ask ICC to host CT matches in Dubai or Sri Lanka


Recommended Posts

Posted
5 minutes ago, neel roy said:

You need to win 4 matches to win a Champions Trophy   In 2017 exactly that happened with Pakistan. They won 2 group league matches lost the third to india. Then sf and final. A round robin with 8 teams is a much better option. At least you ll have to play 9 matches then to win an icc trophy. Indian won the 2013 trophy unbeaten btw. 

We won 1985 B&H unbeaten.

 

2002 CT unbeaten and then shared the trophy.

 

2013 CT unbeaten

 

Lost 1 game each in 2011, 2015. 2 in 2003, 2019, terrific run in 2023 WC with 10-0. 

 

Even in 2012 and 2014 T20 WCs, lost just one game each.

 

Only Australia has been more ruthless in big competitions. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Gollum said:

We won 1985 B&H unbeaten.

 

2002 CT unbeaten and then shared the trophy.

 

2013 CT unbeaten

 

Lost 1 game each in 2011, 2015. 2 in 2003, 2019, terrific run in 2023 WC with 10-0. 

 

Even in 2012 and 2014 T20 WCs, lost just one game each.

 

Only Australia has been more ruthless in big competitions. 

Actual disappointment was 2017 CT. We lost 2 matches out of 5. One against Lanka scoring 320 batting first which was the reason we chose to bowl first against Pakistan in final. 


 

Also  we lost 2 matches in Wt20 2016 ( Santner and dew/ no ball), wt20 2021 ( toss and dewbai), wt20 2022 ( perth pitch against saf and sf against England fiasco)..

Posted
9 minutes ago, neel roy said:

You need to win 4 matches to win a Champions Trophy   In 2017 exactly that happened with Pakistan. They won 2 group league matches lost the third to india. Then sf and final. A round robin with 8 teams is a much better option. At least you ll have to play 9 matches then to win an icc trophy. Indian won the 2013 trophy unbeaten btw. 

CT is of much shorter duration with lesser games, compared to WC.  Coz only the top 8 ranked teams usually play in this.  (SL misses out this time)    It's basically a sort of mini WC.  Needs to be scrapped altogether by ICC.  As the actual WC tends to lose its significance.   

Posted

Toughest thing to win is Olympics field hockey (any medal).

 

First a group of 6-7 teams, no pushover (worst team will still be a continental champ like RSA or Canada) because of deep field. Then QF, SF, F. No medal for simply semi (unlike say boxing, badminton) appearance, you have to play a bronze medal match. Toughest part is you have to play 10 odd games in 12-13 days time (sometimes daily games), hardly any rest, which can be brutal in such an intense, violent, injury ridden sport. In a cricket WC you'll play 10 games in 2 months, this T20 WC almost one month for 8 T20Is for India and RSA. 

 

If India wins CT by just winning 3-4 games they'll get 100 times more financial rewards than our hockey team if we were to medal again. 

Posted

All this is fine and as it should be. But tell me why India and Pak are always put in one group be it any multi national tournament? Why this hypocrisy? Either play them or don't at all. They want to exploit the so called rivalry and earn big bucks (both sides) but won't travel to each other's country due to geopolitics? If the govt cares so much about terrorism then stop playing Pak completely why this double standard? 

Posted
15 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

I will not think of even sending a Domestic C team of some state to Pakistan.

If Congress (Indi Alliance) were in power, I m pretty sure, BCCI, by now, would hv announced the date of departure of our team to Pak for the CT.  Even hotels at lahore would hv been pre-booked. 

Posted

BCCI and Jay Shah should push for SL. We don't want to see us play in that toss-driven venue at Dewbai. If you lose the toss and bat first, the match's done. We've a pretty solid team and I don't want us to lose just because we suck at winning tosses. Let us play our matches in SL or B'desh. I would take Mirpur ahead of Dewbai as a venue as well.

Posted

But they need to do something about this pointless tournament though. It serves zero purpose except adding some more weight to the ICC reserves.

 

They should atleast make it something like the Confederations cup in soccer to make the branding make some sense .

 

1. Winner of Asia cup

2. Winner of Chappel-Hadley trophy (Aus/NZ)

3. Winner of a Euro tournament between England, Ireland, Scotland and Netherlands.

4. Winner of an Afro tournament between South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Kenya.

5. Winner of American tournament between WI, USA, Canada, Bermuda.

 

Add in the hosts and make it a 6 Team short and sharp tournament .. something.. anything other than the pointless grubber of a 15 - day mini wc 

Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Norman said:

But they need to do something about this pointless tournament though. It serves zero purpose except adding some more weight to the ICC reserves.

 

They should atleast make it something like the Confederations cup in soccer to make the branding make some sense .

 

1. Winner of Asia cup

2. Winner of Chappel-Hadley trophy (Aus/NZ)

3. Winner of a Euro tournament between England, Ireland, Scotland and Netherlands.

4. Winner of an Afro tournament between South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Kenya.

5. Winner of American tournament between WI, USA, Canada, Bermuda.

 

Add in the hosts and make it a 6 Team short and sharp tournament .. something.. anything other than the pointless grubber of a 15 - day mini wc 

 

That's a great idea but the challenge is that it'll end up being an extension of Big 3. India will most likely end up from Aisa, Aus will be the odds on favorite to win Chappel-Hadlee trophy, SA will show up from Africa, and Eng from Europe.

 

Cricket is already struggling to enhance diversity and given the small no. of core teams in cricket (8-10), it'll become even more insular. IMO I like the concept of CT and we need to have something similar for T20 too. Would love to have one global tourney every year on similar lines...

 

Year 1: ODI WC

Year 2: T20 CT

Year 3: WT20

Year 4: ODI CT

 

We get one global tourney every year, and over 4 years we have 2 T20 tourneys and 2 ODI tourneys. For Tests, we should hand out a mace to the table toppers as a one-off Test match to determine winner is a joke. Currently, the WTC depends heavily on the venue and India, and other Asian teams, would always be at a disadvantage if the one-off WTC final continues to be held in England.

Edited by Ultimate_Game
Posted
11 minutes ago, Lone Wolf said:

These jaahils don't deserve anything @Gollum

 

 

The only nation where a visiting captain was assaulted on the field, and a visiting team was the target of a terrorist attack!

 

And I'm sure that attacker would've been applauded and treated like royalty the way likes of Dawood Ibrahim and think-tank of 26/11 are.

Posted
4 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Initially mini WC was started to spread cricket in new countries. That's why BD hosted in 98, Kenya in 00. After that just cash grab.

Well, there is still some consistency being shown by ICC.   Now they want to revive cricket in minnow countries like Pak where cricket died sometime ago.  (Much like their Economy)

Posted
2 minutes ago, Frustrated said:

Well, there is still some consistency being shown by ICC.   Now they want to revive cricket in minnow countries like Pak where cricket died sometime ago.  (Much like their Economy)

 

Why not hold it in Zim, B'desh or SL in that case? They haven't hosted an ICC tourney in a while.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...