World Cup likely to be 10 teams

[G_B_]

I think they should raise it to 12 from 10. To accommodate Ireland and Afghanistan. Unlike other sports cricket is mostly an international sport. Football and rugby for eg are mostly domestic sports. T20 format is right for inclusion of other nations. They need to play the T20 WC every 2 years though.

[adi B]

its pretty disappointing but we can understand the logic behind this as we saw some absolute drubbings in 2011 wc. honestly i think,the wc should include 16 sides (thats why its called the world cup) and play the same way as in 2007 with the top2 in each of 4 groups qualifying. then divide the top 8 in 2 groups of 4 each having 2 group toppers and 2 runners up. top 2 from each group from each group qualifies for the semis. this is the best way to include more teams i.e 16 to make the wc look like an actual world cup and also the no.of matches will be reduced unlike 2007. the risk is big teams can face early eliminations,so what,this should be the way!! either this or make the wc small including 10-12 teams with 2 group systems but i dont like it,too small for a wc

[achilles]

Afghanistan and Ireland are two associate team that should play every world cup and get to compete with bigger teams more often at least in ODIs and T20s and let them play tests with smaller teams like BD' date=' Zim, etc. BD, Zim, Ireland, Afghans can form their own test quartet of smaller nations of plate division.[/quote'] ++

[Lord]

:finger: Hey look, we have a closed minded f'tard in this forum ... no better than those f'tard BCCI and co. What people like you fail to realize is that if cricket doesn't grow (test match is going to die out within a couple of years for sure) we will only have India, England and Australia playing it. Pakistan is already getting the stick and god knows if Srilanka will survive. Their board doesn't even pay their players properly. who in the world would want to work without pay? Let's not even talk about Bangladesh. The rest of the nations are not as cricket crazy as the big asian 4 plus Australia and England. Look at both Afganistan and Nepal, they have the hunger for it. If you take that away from them then why in the world would they even want to keep on trying? :finger: x infinite

did you even read my post properly?get someone else to translate it for you if you cant understand simple English:finger: I clearly said 'There are other ways to improve'.Missed that?Just bcoz they dont play in WC doesnt mean they cant improve.There are many ways to do that.like organising A tours with their team,getting them to play in a FC competition etc.

[Temujin Khaghan]

we must get hold of countries like afghanistan and nepal who dont have a representation in sports at the world's stage and are hungry for a sporting identity not countries like china and usa who are giants at the olympics level and have no interest in starting out as minnows in an alien sport. we are more likely to start playing football at the fifa than china playing cricket at the WCT20 in the next 20 years.

[SLICKR392]

:finger: Hey look, we have a closed minded f'tard in this forum ... no better than those f'tard BCCI and co. What people like you fail to realize is that if cricket doesn't grow (test match is going to die out within a couple of years for sure) we will only have India, England and Australia playing it. Pakistan is already getting the stick and god knows if Srilanka will survive. Their board doesn't even pay their players properly. who in the world would want to work without pay? Let's not even talk about Bangladesh. The rest of the nations are not as cricket crazy as the big asian 4 plus Australia and England. Look at both Afganistan and Nepal, they have the hunger for it. If you take that away from them then why in the world would they even want to keep on trying? :finger: x infinite

How naive and retarded are you? Exactly how would you explain this profound theory of your, viz. more number of nations = betterment of Test cricket or rather how is it going to save Test cricket? Cricket isn't Football and fan following in cricket is extremely limited compared to Soccer, hence adding more nations isn't going to help Cricket drastically and neither is it going to save Test cricket. On the topic- Cricket World Cup unlike the Football won't be very thrilling with the minnows. It would be utter boring and the odds of an associate causing an upset is terribly low as opposed to Football. Afghan and Nepal as pointed out by Lord has various other options to improve and make their way to stages as big as the World Cup. And if you think including the likes of Nepal, Afghan is going to help revive Test cricket then god help your ignorance. The longer format is here to stay. Yep, help these nations out and ICC has done a splendid job so far with the associates. To bring the likes of Afghan, Nepal, Dutch, UAE to International cricket itself is a big achievement, but an even like WC can't afford more than 2 non-test playing nations, as of yet. The quality of a Cricket World Cup is byfar superior to a WT20.

[TNAmarkFrmIndia]

we must get hold of countries like afghanistan and nepal who dont have a representation in sports at the world's stage and are hungry for a sporting identity not countries like china and usa who are giants at the olympics level and have no interest in starting out as minnows in an alien sport. we are more likely to start playing football at the fifa than china playing cricket at the WCT20 in the next 20 years.

I think the more important thing is to push those countries that have locals playing the game rather than Expats. When teams like USA, Canada and other European countries where the players of the national team are mostly Indians, Pakistanis and Sri Lankans, the sport isn't going to grow there. If China has locals playing the sport, which they most likely will, then great.

[Temujin Khaghan]

I think the more important thing is to push those countries that have locals playing the game rather than Expats. When teams like USA' date= Canada and other European countries where the players of the national team are mostly Indians, Pakistanis and Sri Lankans, the sport isn't going to grow there. If China has locals playing the sport, which they most likely will, then great.

tell this to England :giggle:

[Zero_Unit]

How naive and retarded are you? Exactly how would you explain this profound theory of your' date= viz. more number of nations = betterment of Test cricket or rather how is it going to save Test cricket? Cricket isn't Football and fan following in cricket is extremely limited compared to Soccer, hence adding more nations isn't going to help Cricket drastically and neither is it going to save Test cricket. On the topic- Cricket World Cup unlike the Football won't be very thrilling with the minnows. It would be utter boring and the odds of an associate causing an upset is terribly low as opposed to Football. Afghan and Nepal as pointed out by Lord has various other options to improve and make their way to stages as big as the World Cup. And if you think including the likes of Nepal, Afghan is going to help revive Test cricket then god help your ignorance. The longer format is here to stay. Yep, help these nations out and ICC has done a splendid job so far with the associates. To bring the likes of Afghan, Nepal, Dutch, UAE to International cricket itself is a big achievement, but an even like WC can't afford more than 2 non-test playing nations, as of yet. The quality of a Cricket World Cup is byfar superior to a WT20.

I clearly did not talk about saving test cricket , I hate test matches, that's the last thing I would defend - read before jumping into conclusion. I am talking about expanding cricket in general. Before writing wtv comes in your mind, ever stopped and wondered how a nation can advance in a X sport without the support of $$$? This is where tv spotlight comes into play. Ever noticed how our team has so many logos on the jersey? Unlike our team, who gets sponsors from left and right, little teams are not so lucky. With little to no support from ICC's big 3, this is essantials for small nations. And not to mention nobody likes to watch the same team play over and over again. If you ask me, Afghanistan, Ireland and Holland has done wonders with the little exposers they got. Time to open up those eyes and see the reality for what it is ... enough said!

[Iconoclast]

Surprised it's not only three teams :P

[panesarv]

DlJEt2KU33I

[RedFever]

:finger: Hey look, we have a closed minded f'tard in this forum ... no better than those f'tard BCCI and co. What people like you fail to realize is that if cricket doesn't grow (test match is going to die out within a couple of years for sure) we will only have India, England and Australia playing it. Pakistan is already getting the stick and god knows if Srilanka will survive. Their board doesn't even pay their players properly. who in the world would want to work without pay? Let's not even talk about Bangladesh. The rest of the nations are not as cricket crazy as the big asian 4 plus Australia and England. Look at both Afganistan and Nepal, they have the hunger for it. If you take that away from them then why in the world would they even want to keep on trying? :finger: x infinite

Pakistan should survive as a nation first. Cricket is secondary.

[Texan]

Cricket cannot be considered a truly world sport if only 10 teams qualify for the World Cup by default and there is no option for any other team to make it. If you don't want the other teams to play in the World Cup, at least have a qualification tournament to select the 10 teams on similar lines as the FIFA qualifying rounds.

[moniker]

Out of the 208 countries that play football (probably all the countries in the world), only 32 end up playing the world cup. And that too after cramming 4 matches per day. Including all the associates and affiliates, there are 106 countries that play cricket. And you need a whole day for an ODI lol. The average duration that a football match takes is what, 110 min, taking the half time break and stoppage time into consideration. So how will you play 32 teams in a cricket world cup lol. Would take months for the tournament to end. Even T20s are played slightly over a longer duration than football. The best way forward is to have 16 teams for the world T20 and 10 teams for the ODI WC as is being followed currently. The tournaments will be of just the right duration. There are better ways to spread the sport than to have a bloated, lengthy and unsuccessful world cup and risk the ICCs main source of income.

[RedFever]

It doesnt help when most of the players in the ICC associate teams are south asians. Look at the scorecard of the match below. Dont think the game is going to spread in these countries when most of the team are made up of expatriates. http://www.espncricinfo.com/wcldiv4-2014/engine/match/749565.html

[rising]

It will be a shame if its only restricted to test playing nations definitely other teams should given chance atleast there should be 12 teams atleast so others can get in aswell If you see FIFA every country in world gets the opportunity to qualify even the mighty nations in football such as England , Spain ,Brazil Germany or Argentina needs to qualify if there not the champions (either by wining world cup or continental champions), so even teams which donot qualify atleast get chance to play against giants (specially in south america and Europe) and show thier talents and with that experience plus club football has helped teams to narrow down the gap to top teams And in Football there is no guarantee if have great players you qualify for free like in cricket as shown by England in Euro 2008 recently

[sachin34357]

16 teams 4 groups of 4 QF SF F total 31 matches