Should Asia Cup be made a T20 nation and make it a 8 nation tournament

[jashan83]

ACC T20 is over but what about Asia Cup The Afghan's won the ACC T20 for a record 3rd time. The tournament has been held just 3 times and each time the Afghans have emerged winners (Though the first time joint winners). The Afghan's have been doing everything right in cricket but does it really matter. First they started with the dream run of qualifying to the World Cricket League Division 5 and from there qualifying to the World Cup Qualifiers barely just missing the world cup spot though gaining the ODI status. Then they grabbed just 2 spots for ICC World Twenty 20 becoming the first associate so do so. Then they won the Inter Continental Trophy as well as Asian Games silver. This couldn't be anything better than this. Adding to this the Afghan's have proved that they are cut above the rest by winning all ACC Tournaments they have been playing. The ACC Champions:Afghanistan ©Asian Cricket Council Now we ask shouldn't this team be playing in the Asia Cup. Surprisingly the big four of Asia say no. The Asia Cup has been known to give a chance to the Asian Associate irrelevant to their standing at World Level. Even when Bangladesh was not a top Associate Globally they still got to play in the Asia Cup several times. They were pathetic but still the teams never had any problems. Then the Asia Cup became more considerate with it including the top 2 Associates. Both times UAE and HK got a chance. But come 2010 this has suddenly changed. The 2007 WC Experience has brought in hell for Associates. With India and Pakistan both losing Associates rather than Complacency was being blamed for that. in 2010 the Asia Cup was reduced back to 4 from 6 a huge step backwards. Time has being given as a reason. Due to this fact the 2012 Asia Cup is again a 4 nation tournament. The Asia Cup is a revenue earner for ACC besides the huge 50% Allocation they get out of ICC Development fund. The big 4 nations just get a participating fee. With BCCI becoming more and more arrogant over time this meant the small participating fee seemed too small. Adjusting to a 6 nation tournament was simply impossible and ACC needed money. Hence they had to agree. The Associate nations have been asking for a few set of matches. The only difference between Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Ireland or Afghanistan is that the first 2 get 7.5% Share of Funding which is about 7 to 8 times more than the latter 2. The First 2 also get a chance to earn through the tours of various countries like India, Australia or England while the latter 2 simply do not get it. This has made even Bangladesh arrogant not to play against team like Ireland or Afghanistan very well knowing that a defeat would bring questions on their test status. So it rather prefers not to play rather than playing a Afghanistan or Zimbabwe So in such a condition what should ACC do. The answer is very simple. The ACC wants the Asia Cup for money and if possible for exposure to new countries. So what is the format that brings most money and also is recognized globally as a tool for expansion. Yes my friends you are right the answer is T20. The ACC should consider making the Asia Cup a T20 tournament. This solves many of their problems 1. It is much more easy to adjust in busy schedules of India, Pakistan or Sri Lanka since T20 takes less times 2. T20 gives possibility of higher incomes 3. More teams can be adjusted in the tournament 4. The tournament gives ACC a chance to expand the game into more nations hence widening the possible income stream 5. Less wear and tear for the players Hence the answer is clear. It is high time Asia Cup cup for 20 overs now. It should be a 8 team tournament with top 4 Associates joining the 4 test nations. T20 games can be more competitive with more chances of upset which makes the whole thing interesting. The tournament should have 2 pools of 4 each followed by semi's and finals. After the present tournament the line would have been Pool A:- India, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Nepal Pool B:- Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Hong Kong, Oman This would mean both Afghanistan and Nepal have a chance to prove a point against Bangladesh and the Bangla's cannot take it easy. Similarly a resurgent Hong Kong and Oman will have a experience they will never want to forget. It is said life goes in circles. The ICC was a closed house then they expanded by adding 3 test nation to present 3 then closed door outside commonwealth then opened to new nations as Associates then kept the test nation guarded as 6 then expanded the cricket to increase membership to 105 and 16 nations world cup before closing. Now it is time for expansion. I hope it comes soon and cricket goes with the market and not as a communist system. http://jashan-celebrating-life.blogspot.com/2011/12/acc-t20-is-over-but-what-about-asia-cup.html

[jashan83]

Can the mods update the heading as "Should Asia Cup be made in T20 format and 8 nation Tournament"

[Andrew Peter]

Which are the minnow teams that have qualified for the 2012 wt20 in sri lanka ?

[jashan83]

Andrew 16 teams have qualified for the 2012 World Cup qualifier. The 16 teams are ODI Status Nations:- Afghanistan, Canada, Ireland, Kenya, Netherlands & Scotland Africa:- Namibia & Uganda Americas:- Bermuda & USA Asia:- Hong Kong, Nepal & Oman EAP:- PNG Europe:- Denmark & Italy Out of these only 2 teams qualify. Earlier when the qualification process has started it was supposed to give 6 nation for a 16 nation World Twenty20 but it was reduced to 2 nation for 12 nation World Twenty20

[Vilander]

No T20 - Clublevel throughout year with WT20 once in 2 years ODI - Country level through summer with WC once in 4 years, bilateral series with 3-5 odi's Test - Country level throughout season, with minimum of 5 tests. is the best

[Andrew Peter]

Andrew 16 teams have qualified for the 2012 World Cup qualifier. The 16 teams are ODI Status Nations:- Afghanistan, Canada, Ireland, Kenya, Netherlands & Scotland Africa:- Namibia & Uganda Americas:- Bermuda & USA Asia:- Hong Kong, Nepal & Oman EAP:- PNG Europe:- Denmark & Italy Out of these only 2 teams qualify. Earlier when the qualification process has started it was supposed to give 6 nation for a 16 nation World Twenty20 but it was reduced to 2 nation for 12 nation World Twenty20

Thanks for the Info. I guess the two qualified teams would be Afghanistan and Ireland / Netherlands . The decision to curb the number of participating nations to 12 was stupid , should have been atleast 14 with Afghanistan , Kenya , Netherlands and Ireland as minnow qualifiers who are more than capable of surprising any top opponent on there day .

[jairamesh]

I think it's a fair point, but no. Four reasons: 1) Associates need to develop cricket, and the best way and cheapest way is through 50 over cricket. T20 will only undermine development and produce hit and giggle players. 2) The likes of Oman, Hong Kong, UAE etc.. should not play as they are basically teams full of ringers from India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, hence provide no discernable TV home market, show me an Arab who thinks cricket balls and bats are not something you lob over Gaza Bank. 3) If anything Afghanistan, Nepal, Kenya, Ireland, and Holland should create their on single voting bloc (which I think they have) and develop their on local TV market which Aghanistan and Nepal are well placed (cricket as symbol of nationalism -like Ind, Pak, SL, and Bang- is quite popular, hence good broadcasters could exploit this). 4) Admitting Afghanistan & Nepal will just create another Bangladesh as administrators and players will become complacent and drunk on money making them stagnate in development of infrastructure. In conclusion, ACC (and ICC) needs to stop funding ringer nations like Oman, UAE, Kuwait, Hong Kong etc, where the indigenous population are in absolute ignorance of cricket. They should be funding and supporting cricket in places like Afghanistan, Nepal, Malaysia, Bhutan, Myanmar Thailand, etc. where cricket is popular to a degree amongst the native population which can drive the TV market and fund domestic infrastructure, hence there will be no need for begging to BCCI. And finally from all the Asian associates and affiliates, the country with the best overall package to succeed at international cricket (to follow in footsteps of SL and Bangladesh) is Nepal. They actually have good youth system (paying dividends now), popularity, safe to host home games, can become a popular (and unique) cricket destination, decent size market, access to Indian domestic tournaments for Nepali players.

[Sachin=GOD]

Yeah sure - thats exactly what we need!! Moar Tontee-Tontee B->

[rajmarie]

Lol...but I dont understand..how come a hit & giggle player like Warner from Aus played to good in the recently concluded Test with NZ? Tontee-Tontee will be Cricket future....thats what the TV channels demand...& TV money is what rules Cricket these days.

[Ponka]

Why ganeshran is not replying to ideas these days and suggesting new ones? :giggle:

[Old guy]

plz no more t 20 :(( i dont even like it apart from those world cup games i dont even remeb any match so boring batsman slogging,bowlers bowling slower balls more than normal ones predictable cricket i dont see how it will do any one good..

[jashan83]

Well the Asia Cup was made a 6 nation tournament and then suddenly reduced to 4 nations. This was because Asia Cup gave only participating fee to the Big 4 and they found it difficult to find time for such a tournament. The Associate nations need exposure. They are being denied like making T20 World Cup 12 nation from 16 nation, Asia Cup 6 to 4. With a T20 format many of these problems will be solved. It is much better than again and again seeing Eng V Ind to switch to Aus V Ind then maybe a WI or BD or NZ or then 10 times SL. Bi Lateral Tests are very nice but ODI's and T20 no no. It is better to have just bi lateral test and then have multi nation ODI or T20 tournaments.

[Sir john]

Bermuda is there too.

[Stuge]

Bermuda is there too.

bermuda isn't a part of Asia :whack::whack:

[jashan83]

I think it's a fair point, but no. Four reasons: 1) Associates need to develop cricket, and the best way and cheapest way is through 50 over cricket. T20 will only undermine development and produce hit and giggle players. 2) The likes of Oman, Hong Kong, UAE etc.. should not play as they are basically teams full of ringers from India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, hence provide no discernable TV home market, show me an Arab who thinks cricket balls and bats are not something you lob over Gaza Bank. 3) If anything Afghanistan, Nepal, Kenya, Ireland, and Holland should create their on single voting bloc (which I think they have) and develop their on local TV market which Aghanistan and Nepal are well placed (cricket as symbol of nationalism -like Ind, Pak, SL, and Bang- is quite popular, hence good broadcasters could exploit this). 4) Admitting Afghanistan & Nepal will just create another Bangladesh as administrators and players will become complacent and drunk on money making them stagnate in development of infrastructure. In conclusion, ACC (and ICC) needs to stop funding ringer nations like Oman, UAE, Kuwait, Hong Kong etc, where the indigenous population are in absolute ignorance of cricket. They should be funding and supporting cricket in places like Afghanistan, Nepal, Malaysia, Bhutan, Myanmar Thailand, etc. where cricket is popular to a degree amongst the native population which can drive the TV market and fund domestic infrastructure, hence there will be no need for begging to BCCI. And finally from all the Asian associates and affiliates, the country with the best overall package to succeed at international cricket (to follow in footsteps of SL and Bangladesh) is Nepal. They actually have good youth system (paying dividends now), popularity, safe to host home games, can become a popular (and unique) cricket destination, decent size market, access to Indian domestic tournaments for Nepali players.

Very nice post. It shows you are very well informed on the topic. Well I agree with you that T20 is not the best way to develop but under present circumstances the boards like BCCI are too arrogant to play smaller nations. For Asia Cup they have to be begged for time. Since the scenario is such and now in Asia Cup they are not playing the smaller nations hence keeping the ground realities T20 is the answer. If it can be made a 6 nation 50 over tournament I will be more than happy

[jashan83]

I think it's a fair point, but no. Four reasons: 1) Associates need to develop cricket, and the best way and cheapest way is through 50 over cricket. T20 will only undermine development and produce hit and giggle players. 2) The likes of Oman, Hong Kong, UAE etc.. should not play as they are basically teams full of ringers from India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, hence provide no discernable TV home market, show me an Arab who thinks cricket balls and bats are not something you lob over Gaza Bank. 3) If anything Afghanistan, Nepal, Kenya, Ireland, and Holland should create their on single voting bloc (which I think they have) and develop their on local TV market which Aghanistan and Nepal are well placed (cricket as symbol of nationalism -like Ind, Pak, SL, and Bang- is quite popular, hence good broadcasters could exploit this). 4) Admitting Afghanistan & Nepal will just create another Bangladesh as administrators and players will become complacent and drunk on money making them stagnate in development of infrastructure. In conclusion, ACC (and ICC) needs to stop funding ringer nations like Oman, UAE, Kuwait, Hong Kong etc, where the indigenous population are in absolute ignorance of cricket. They should be funding and supporting cricket in places like Afghanistan, Nepal, Malaysia, Bhutan, Myanmar Thailand, etc. where cricket is popular to a degree amongst the native population which can drive the TV market and fund domestic infrastructure, hence there will be no need for begging to BCCI. And finally from all the Asian associates and affiliates, the country with the best overall package to succeed at international cricket (to follow in footsteps of SL and Bangladesh) is Nepal. They actually have good youth system (paying dividends now), popularity, safe to host home games, can become a popular (and unique) cricket destination, decent size market, access to Indian domestic tournaments for Nepali players.

For Hong Kong, the team is completely indigenous. Most of the players have come from U-16 and U-19 programs. The game is quite popular in the South Asian + British Ancestory population which make roughly 8% of the population. Sadly the 90%+ Chinese population is that is not been garnered. So I would not put HK under the category of UAE or Kuwait or Saudi Arabia Interestingly for Oman they have 3 native Arab players. Infact one of the players is a Royal Prince who is taking efforts to take the game to Arab population. You can read the same in this article here http://www.cricket.com.np/new/2011/12/10/omans-royal-cricketer/

[Sir john]

@Stuge abey hoshiya chand i mean BERMUDA have chance to qulify for t20 world cup.

[jashan83]

Yes Sir John but what are your views on Asia Cup. Which team do u support in Asia since Kenya and Bermuda unluckily are not in Asia :)

[Hell Raiser]

:nono::nono:

[ViruRulez]

I am not against including minnows but definitely not a tontee tontee tournament. Let them have their own qualifier round after which they can play with the big teams. Having said that, Bangladesh should also compete with the minnows as I am not convinced they are better than the minnows at least outside their home nation. At most, I can bear one ODI against a minnow team (including BD) but not more than that. Not discouraging minnows but too many minnow matches just take the interest out of the tournament.