Params7 Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 Funny T20 is not called the world cup because technically its more of a world cup than the real WC. 10-14 teams in ODI WC vs 16 nations for World T20. I really think there's nothing wrong in calling World T20 the T20 WC. Also because the skill gap is low in T20's it can be used to spread cricket to newer regions but those regions really can't be a real cricket nation until they at least step it up up competitively playing 50 over ODI's and then Tests. But this is something very, very hard to do at least with the way ICC operates. I doubt 10 years from now we''ll see any new nations join the Test club. Ireland is fighting, rightfully so for their ODI WC rights so hopefully the get plenty of support and success there.
Pak_Forever Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 T20 world tournament should be called something like T20 Champions. Glorious name of "World Cup" should be kept far away from this joke toonte toonte format.
panesarv Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 ODI jersey can have 2 stars and the T20 jersey can have 1 star :D
CoverDrive Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 Why not have Worldt20 also every 4 years - that way there will be value to it and we will have world cups every alternate year . Right now we are in a situation where every years there seems to be a world cup. 2007- 2 World cups 2009 - T20 2010 - again t20? (what the hell was the justification for this one) 2011 - 50 over cup 2012 - T20 again 2014 - T20 2015- 50 over 2016 - T20 I guess 2013 is the unlucky year :)
Prakat Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 ICC's plan is to have one big ICC tournament every year. Sponsorships and broadcast rights for these big ticket events generate a lot of revenue.
Stuge Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 It doesn't matter whether you play T20 or 50-50 .IF you wear your countries jersey then you should give your 100 % be it test ,T20 or 50-50 and I'm sure our players know that .
Sir_Afridi Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 Why not have Worldt20 also every 4 years - that way there will be value to it and we will have world cups every alternate year . Right now we are in a situation where every years there seems to be a world cup. 2007- 2 World cups 2009 - T20 2010 - again t20? (what the hell was the justification for this one) 2011 - 50 over cup 2012 - T20 again 2014 - T20 2015- 50 over 2016 - T20 I guess 2013 is the unlucky year :) 2013 will have ICC CT
Stuge Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 Well,every year is a world cup year these days..ICC should stop over feeding us with cricket :cantstop:
phaedrus Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 Why not have Worldt20 also every 4 years - that way there will be value to it and we will have world cups every alternate year . Right now we are in a situation where every years there seems to be a world cup. 2007- 2 World cups 2009 - T20 2010 - again t20? (what the hell was the justification for this one) 2011 - 50 over cup 2012 - T20 again 2014 - T20 2015- 50 over 2016 - T20 I guess 2013 is the unlucky year :) I think they didnt want both the events to clash again like it did in 2007. stupid really, should have pushed back the '09 one by 1 year
jashan83 Posted April 12, 2011 Posted April 12, 2011 I've noticed that before the 50 over World Cup, our boys had 2 gold stars on their Jerseys. This was changed to 1 for the World Cup. Now that we've won the World Cup, I hear we will have 3 stars. I don't agree with this. When we won the inaugral World T20, we were under the impression it would be every 4 years, and it was a major thing. Now it's held nearly every year, making it possible for almost anyone to win it. Also, it can be fluked, whereas 50 overs+ requires serious cricketing skill. I don't think the World T20 is worthy of being classed as a proper World Cup, even the Champions Trophy holds more prestige. Agree?/Disagree? Disagree. It brings in loads of money for ICC which is used for development of cricket. Also it is the format that will take cricket to new markets
ganeshran Posted April 12, 2011 Posted April 12, 2011 Lol as soon as we won the ODI world cup people start to play down the significance of 20-20. Its a different format and a different world cup. Cant compare that with ODI tournaments. Ten years down the lane, there might not be any market for the 50 over game and 20-20 could be considered the pinnacle of cricketing excellence. You never know
Cricket Tragic Posted April 12, 2011 Posted April 12, 2011 That will never happen. The World Test Championship will be in place soon and that will become the pinnacle of the sport, followed by the World Cup. The World T20 is not in the same league.
cricketfan2010 Posted April 12, 2011 Posted April 12, 2011 World T20 is not a world cup. 1 ODI WORLD CUP= 3 World T20 I wouldn't even compare the two. Even mediocre teams can win T20 world cups.. But to win ODI world cup or achieve number 1 ranking in test you have to play proper cricket.
Gotham Cronie Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 So Champions trophy is also a World cup because every nation plays in it. And so India also won World cup in 1985 because in World championship series every nation participate in it. The Champions trophy is only the top 8 nations in the world. The World Championship series didn't include South Africa.
Gotham Cronie Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 The WC and Champions trophy should be every 4 years. The Twenty20 should be every 2 years. You could swap the Twenty20 and Champions Trophy Cup so that the Twenty20 is every 4 years and the Champions trophy is every 2 years but I think since the Twenty20 is where the ICC wants to introduce the Associates, it should be more often. Also it gives more of an opportunity to the full member nations to find new talent. For example: 2011 - World Cup 2012 - Twenty20 2013 - Champions Trophy 2014 - Twenty20 2015 - World Cup 2016 - Twenty20 2017 - Champions Trophy 2018 - Twenty20
satyam1729 Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 The Champions trophy is only the top 8 nations in the world. The World Championship series didn't include South Africa. SA were not in 1983 or 1987 WC. So that were not WC. :giggle::giggle:
Gotham Cronie Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 SA were not in 1983 or 1987 WC. So that were not WC. :giggle::giggle: Well then they were missing Zimbabwe. :winky:
satyam1729 Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 Well then they were missing Zimbabwe. :winky: There was no zimbawe in 2006 or 2009 CT.:winky:
Gotham Cronie Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 There was no zimbawe in 2006 or 2009 CT.:winky: Yeah, because the CT is only the top 8 nations in the world.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now