Should minnows be allowed to play in the 50 over world cup

[The Outsider]

I don't claim to have any knowledge of football in China, so looked up their Wiki page and it seems to be telling quite a different story to what 'someone' said above, specifically :

In fact, due to the poor reputation and performance of the Chinese football, the sport has repidly been dwindled. In 1995, there were over 650,000 registered under 20 youth players were playing. Howerver since 2008, there were only about 7,000 registered under 20 youth players are playing. Also, its popularity has already been surpassed by basketball for quite some time.

Can someone with better knowledge of football confirm which version is true?

[Sir john]

@outy paaji they deserve 2 teams in world cup.

[Sir john]

@satyam they are full members of ICC

[asterix]

The quickly the matches with these piss poor minnows finishes, the better. Absolute waste of time..The ICC babus have scheduled the matches one every day.. Effing waste of time..

[Jersey #10]

Should minnows be allowed to open threads? :hmmm:

[Sachin=GOD]

Should minnows be allowed to open threads? :hmmm:

Sir John is allowed :hitler:

[girishk14]

Next Zimb and Bang will be sent out, then NZ and WI, then Eng and Pak, then SL, SA and Aus. And Pawar will keep the cup in india.

[Raghav_12]

Few people made comparison with FIFA world cup to buttress their argument of reduction in number of teams in ICC world cup. I think this point is counter productive. In fact FIFA makes more attempts to globalize football through their premier tournament, world cup. Few years ago only they increased the number of teams in final phase from 24 to 32 to include more teams from Africa and Asia, teams which have absolutely no chance of taking cup home. If you look in terms of numbers, in any FIFA world cup there are just 8-9 teams which have realistic chance of winning WC, which is around 25% of starting lot and there are 50% of the teams which can be considered as no hope for WC. If you compare this with ICC world cup there are 6-7 teams which have realistic chance of laying their hands on cup, and that is around 50% of the teams, even in current format. I have given these numbers based on general perception, but can very well be logically proven using betting odds. Problem is not with number of teams but with the format of ICC tournament. If we did not have QF round in current world cup and had SF directly from group stages, trust me league stage matches would have had more at stake. In that case, more permutation and combinations would have been possible and run-rate from each match would have mattered, unlike current situation where in group A, it is foregone conclusion that Australia, Pak, SL and NZ will progress to QF, whatever is the case.

[Kriterion]

i agree teams like Canada are pretty uninspiring with almost zero non-immigrants playing. but the Irish and Afghans have lots of ethnic players + there is opportunity to build popular interest. a 12 team world cup therefore would be a perfect number. at the same time, they should play in domestic leageus in India, Australia, etc. as well as perhaps play several ODIs against the major sides (if burnout is a concern, just 2nd an unofficial A team), that would still help.

[DomainK]

I know from experience that in every game/sport one can improve immensely by playing stronger opponents.

[broken_wings]

Bangladesh .

Bangladesh is ranked 8. So, if you consider G8, then WI and Ireland are minnows. :)

[ravishingravi]

Well this WC might fast track the extinction of ODIs. Nearly 3 weeks of meaningless cricket in a tournament of this magnitude is simply unacceptable. I want the minnows to be groomed. But only a couple of them with max 10 teams playing. This is absolutely pathetic stuff, knee jerk reaction to last WC. Btw how is one WC going to help minnows if they play nearly no top class cricket in between

[satyam1729]

Bangladesh is ranked 8. So' date=' if you consider G8, then WI and Ireland are minnows. :)[/quote'] Bangladesh ranking is due to WI player strike.

[broken_wings]

So, how is ICC going to decide which 10 teams to play in WC 2015 ? Only 10 Test playing countries (since Zim's test status is restoring again) ? No Ireland/ kenya then ? I would rather want to see 10 test playing countries + 2 associate countries = 12 teams.

[broken_wings]

Bangladesh ranking is due to WI player strike.

whatever the reason is, Bangladesh is currently number 8 team in the world.

[Zero_Unit]

This is one of the stupidest and the most arrogant move ICC has made. How can they possibly make the game global if they are cutting teams off WC. Not to mention, no test playing nation wants to have a tournament with the lower ranked teams. So how do you expect them to learn more if all they do it play against each other. Eitherway, the way Ireland and Zimbabew is growing (even Canada in some instance), these 3 teams might be as good as BD was during 2007 WC (or even better, espacialy IRELAND). By 2015, BD will most likey play head to head with the big boys (not a surprise there). And looking at WI, they might end up ranked under Ireland or ZIM before the WC15. So where is the logic of getting 10 teams to play the wc is beyond me. Screw you ICC :finger:

[The Outsider]

Few people made comparison with FIFA world cup to buttress their argument of reduction in number of teams in ICC world cup. I think this point is counter productive. In fact FIFA makes more attempts to globalize football through their premier tournament, world cup. Few years ago only they increased the number of teams in final phase from 24 to 32 to include more teams from Africa and Asia, teams which have absolutely no chance of taking cup home. If you look in terms of numbers, in any FIFA world cup there are just 8-9 teams which have realistic chance of winning WC, which is around 25% of starting lot and there are 50% of the teams which can be considered as no hope for WC. If you compare this with ICC world cup there are 6-7 teams which have realistic chance of laying their hands on cup, and that is around 50% of the teams, even in current format. I have given these numbers based on general perception, but can very well be logically proven using betting odds.

How many teams in the FIFA WC are rank minnows - get pasted by 8-10 goals in every match they play? How many matches are played in front of empty stadiums like the Kenya-NZ match was and a lot more will be in this WC? Matches for which no one gives a damn even on a weekend. The longer the game of cricket the more the difference in class is exposed. Next what, you guys will want these trashy teams to play test cricket? Let them play T20 every 2 years. Before T20, fine one could have the argument that there was no global exposure for these teams. Well now there is a T20 WC every other year. Are you guys going to say Bermuda should be playing the World Test Championship when it starts because of the word 'World'?

Problem is not with number of teams but with the format of ICC tournament. If we did not have QF round in current world cup and had SF directly from group stages, trust me league stage matches would have had more at stake. In that case, more permutation and combinations would have been possible and run-rate from each match would have mattered, unlike current situation where in group A, it is foregone conclusion that Australia, Pak, SL and NZ will progress to QF, whatever is the case.

What? You want the semi finalists to be decided on the basis of their minnow bashing abilities? 'Oh I bashed Canada by 200 runs, and you could only do it by 190 so I play the semi final'? There are too many minnow teams in the tournament and the format is also messed up. For matches of the premier world cricket event to be played in front of empty stands in a cricket crazy region of the world is a shame and a sign that something is terribly wrong.

[The Outsider]

at the same time, they should play in domestic leageus in India, Australia, etc. as well as perhaps play several ODIs against the major sides (if burnout is a concern, just 2nd an unofficial A team), that would still help.

Exactly. If a team finishes in the top 2 of a premier domestic league like India, Australia for 5 years running, then promote them for more regular international cricket. That is the right way to grow and expand cricket rather than subject them to one sided thrashings and debase international cricket in the process.

[Manny_Pacquiao]

the world cup without minnows would be the ICC champions trophy. i think it helps to have minnows in there, they are capable of causing upsets (almost every world cup has produced one upset) and have progressed past the 1st round on occasion.

[Raghav_12]

How many teams in the FIFA WC are rank minnows - get pasted by 8-10 goals in every match they play? How many matches are played in front of empty stadiums like the Kenya-NZ match was and a lot more will be in this WC? Matches for which no one gives a damn even on a weekend. The longer the game of cricket the more the difference in class is exposed. Next what, you guys will want these trashy teams to play test cricket? Let them play T20 every 2 years. Before T20, fine one could have the argument that there was no global exposure for these teams. Well now there is a T20 WC every other year. Are you guys going to say Bermuda should be playing the World Test Championship when it starts because of the word 'World'? What? You want the semi finalists to be decided on the basis of their minnow bashing abilities? 'Oh I bashed Canada by 200 runs, and you could only do it by 190 so I play the semi final'? There are too many minnow teams in the tournament and the format is also messed up. For matches of the premier world cricket event to be played in front of empty stands in a cricket crazy region of the world is a shame and a sign that something is terribly wrong.

Though I don't disagree with you, but you missing main point. My point is despite starting with 32 teams, only few teams have any realistic chance of winning world cup and rest of the countries are just passengers and you can say are there just to make up the numbers. See betting odds for FIFA 2010

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5410270/2010_world_cup_favorites_and_betting.html Spain 4/1 (Sportsbook); 7/2 (Bodog) Brazil 5/1 (Sportsbook); 9/2 (Bodog) England 6/1 (Sportsbook); 7/1 (Bodog) Argentina 15/2 (Sportsbook); 13/2 (Bodog) Netherlands 11/1 (Sportsbook); 11/1(Bodog) Germany 12/1 (Sportsbook); 16/1 (Bodog) Italy 12/1 (Sportsbook); 14/1(Bodog) France 18/1 (Sportsbook); 16/1 (Bodog)

Only 8 teams outta 32 were having odds less than 20, means had any realistic chance of winning cup. 24 teams were there just to make up numbers or you can say to gain experience.(In ICC world cup, 8 teams have odds less than 25 and 6 less than 10) Similarly in any Grand Slam we start with 128 players, knowing very well that many of them are there just to make numbers. How many times Federer's first round match has been any thing but formality? How many times Sania Mirza has gone to Grand Slam for any purpose other than making up the numbers or to gain some WTA points? My point is when all other sports start with such a big group, then why Cricket should not? I agree that game of cricket by nature exposes gulf between two teams very clearly which is not there is Soccer. But that is not reason enough to exclude majority from having first hand experience. I again say that it not problem of number of team we start with but problem of format of tournament which makes many of matches including minnows as redundant. your other example on net run rate is simple exaggeration. I had pointed out to a possible situation where one strong team has to beat a minnow by some 150 runs or so, to advance to next stage. This kind of scenarios will make matches involving minnows somehow interesting.