AmreekanDesi Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 I know that Ireland are a feel good story and may they do well even more but on the whole I feel taht having associates are a waste of time and money Seeing them beaten to pulp helps no one and one minnow upset in a WC every 4 years doesnt really mean much. Its the law of averages more than anything else Cricket was always meant to be an exclusive game played by a few countries where it was developed at the right time and IMO that is the beauty of cricket And the highest, purest, most prestigious form of cricket is Test cricket for which even 10 test nations a few too many. The aim of any team is to gain test status but it is just impossible to get to the level of the top test teams. So they will only ever dilute the competition like Bangladesh. If anything Bang and Zim should be part of associates now And finally. Regardless of an upset. These guys serve absolute bore fests because no one knows who the feck is playing. Its no fun watching a game (even if it is exciting) if you cant name more than half the team. Ive had this opinion since the WC in 2011 when the 2 matches I got to watch at the Kotla were: - Canada v Kenya - (i entered when 20 overs had passed and left within the end of first innings) - Holland v WI - WI beat the dutch to pulp. Yes an avg team of that WC like WI dominated like no tomorrow So what did anyone gain out of these matches? I totally agree with the proposed 10 team WC for the next edition 8 spots guaranteed and WI, Ire, Zim, Afgh, Bang and the like can have a pre tournament to decide the other 2 spots or sth What do you guys think? I remember once Aus beat US by 260 runs or sth and Ponting was like 'wtf was the point of this???'
Cricketics Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 What if Australia and England kept playing between themselves?. The game has to expand. And I am fine with few one sided matches. The problem to these one sided matches is that the fixtures need to be such that the top 4 qualifying teams get to play top 8 often in four years before world cup. Atleast enough games like sides like Bangladesh are playing.
Sonix768 Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 After seeing how ICC operates, I'd prefer 50 over WC played with 12 teams max.. 10 also OK.. It's T20 where more opportunities should be given to the associates. Its great that we are having 16 team T20 WC. ICC doesn't care about test series not involving the BIG 3. We have 3+ match test series happening only between the Big 3 (AUS, ENG, IND). And it seems ICC not interested in giving test status to any new countries anymore. * SA, a great test team, do not play 3+ test series more often (last time they played in 2009 against Eng, a 4 match series). * WI last played a 3+ series in 2009 against England (5 matches). Since then its 10 3 match and 9 2 match series. * Pak last played a 3+ series in 2010 against England (4 matches). * NZ last played a 3+ series in 1999 against England (4 matches). 15 years ago! * SL never played a 3+ series. NEVER EVER! Their last 5 series are 2 match affairs. ODI is also similar to Test Cricket, except instead of Big 3 domination, here its Big 8 domination. The other countries hardly play consistent ODI against Big 8, so no exposure to them. So big 8 + max 4 countries should be the ideal case for WC. Anything more than that, you are just making up numbers, since ICC is not giving much opportunities to the lesser teams in non-WC days. T20 is an unpredictable format where associates can have a better day against a top team more often. You don't need a proper technique and temperament which lacks in a lot of associates teams, to succeed in T20s. With the limited opportunities provided so far, already a team like Netherlands beat England twice, gave SA a scare. Zim beat Aussies. So if we have more matches involving associates and big teams, the number of boring one siders would be less. So it's right that ICC tries to expand T20 WC while trying to shrink 50 over WC.
FischerTal Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 On the contrary game of cricket needs to expand. It makes the game more interesting and its wonderful to see the rise of new cricket stars.
AmreekanDesi Posted February 18, 2015 Author Posted February 18, 2015 On the contrary game of cricket needs to expand. It makes the game more interesting and its wonderful to see the rise of new cricket stars. name one star who has risen outsie big 8 all these years? Maybe Shakib? The last minnow to make the grade up to a proper cricketing nation was SL. Cricket and especially its pinnacle in the form of test cricket does not enocurage or have the space to have more than 7-8 top teams. And for me this exclusivity and the whole tour of countries is what makes our game beautiful. It was always meant as an exclusive sport and im not a big fan of getting every Ed, Chan and Mario to be fed dreams of playing cricket at the highest level and consequently wasting our time
Sonix768 Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 On the contrary game of cricket needs to expand. I agree but T20 is the right format to do it. Not 50 overs, which might be boring and time consuming for the people in smaller nation in which we'd like Cricket to grow. And ICC is doing correct in including 16 teams in the upcoming T20 WC.
FischerTal Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 name one star who has risen outsie big 8 all these years? Maybe Shakib? The last minnow to make the grade up to a proper cricketing nation was SL. Cricket and especially its pinnacle in the form of test cricket does not enocurage or have the space to have more than 7-8 top teams. And for me this exclusivity and the whole tour of countries is what makes our game beautiful. It was always meant as an exclusive sport and im not a big fan of getting every Ed, Chan and Mario to be fed dreams of playing cricket at the highest level and consequently wasting our time Just look at the current game going on. If the likes of Shapoor, dawlat, and Hamid Hassan are given exposure, they could be premier fast bowlers
CoverDrive Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 a lot of the associate players Ten Doeschate, Stirling, Hamid, Shapoor are all really good players and can challenge the best players these teams are now much better than before - likes of bermuda will never make it now IReland, Afghanistan definitely belong in a world cup.
bowl_out Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 Maybe ICC should have an Associate XI vs Eng tournament played at Irish stadium
adi B Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 yes they should be.best format was the 99,2003 without a doubt
zen Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 Let the associates enjoy the world cup, however, I am of the opinion of cutting down the teams to 8. One example of such a format would be - the host and defending champions automatically qualify. The next 3 slots go to the remaining top sides based on ODI rankings, and for the last 3 slots - the lower ranked ODI sides play with top 3 associates to qualify for the WC In the WC - the qualified 8 teams play each other in the round-robin format. The winner of the league automatically qualifies for the final as a reward for finishing first in the league. The #2 and #3 play a KO for a place in the final This format puts quality over quantity. And since top 3 associates play the bottom 3 ODI sides, quality associate teams have the opportunity to qualify for the WC as well. The qualification games can be played on a home and away basis, so the associates can benefit from home playing conditions and support as well. These would ensure that the top well oiled and in-form sides play at the world stage PS to illustrate Spot(s) / Team(s) 1. Host 2. Defending Champion 3, 4 & 5. Best ranked ODIs sides excluding the host and defending champtions 6, 7 & 8. Based on qualification matches amongst the remaining ODI sides and top 3-4 associates
maniac Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 @OP I think you are 4 years too late in opening this thread....If you had made this point in 2011 I would have totally agreed with you,but in this tournament so far with the exception of UAE,every associate nation+Zim and Bangladesh look like they can pull off an upset. This might very well to be due to the declining standards of some full members but can't deny that this is probably the most dangerous collection of minnows ever. WI got smashed by S.A and lost to Ireland but they still managed to win a ODI in S.A from a back to the wall situation...they won the T20 series which says they have some collection of dangerous hacks who on their day can win the game. Bangladesh from time to time have run teams close or beaten teams on occasions...Yes rare but they do have the capacity to pull the odd upset like a decent minnow side usually can. Ireland-Their performances speak for themselves,they also have English county exposure and usually a very dangerous associate side like they have shown in 3 editions already. Zimbabwe-This is probably the best they have looked since 1999-2000,seem to be making a resurgence. Scotland-pleasantly surprised...seem to be competitive. Afghanistan-Poor batting but has some good bowlers...can test teams in tricky conditions but maybe on the weaker side compared to other associates or minnow teams but loads of potential there in terms of fan base as well as raw untapped talent. U.A.E-Yes your typical making up the numbers minnow and I agree with you. Now coming to full members-already covered WI- Pak,Ind,SL,Eng all look vulnerable for an upset in this tournament. Australia-recently lost to Zimbabwe but apart from that Aus,SA and Nz are the only clear cut dominant teams in this WC-Even Nzl limped their way against Scotland and SA were in a spot of bother.
maniac Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 Let the associates enjoy the world cup' date=' [b']however, I am of the opinion of cutting down the teams to 8. One example of such a format would be - the host and defending champions automatically qualify. The next 3 slots go to the remaining top sides based on ODI rankings, and for the last 3 slots - the lower ranked ODI sides play with top 3 associates to qualify In the WC - the top 8 teams play each other the round-robin format. The winner of the league automatically qualifies for the final as a reward for finishing first. The #2 and #3 play a KO for a place in the final. There is always C.T for it. Even in Soccer worldcup which is lot more competitive obviously,teams like Saudi Arabia,North Korea had qualified in the past despite being way below the standard. Some other minnow teams have raised their game as well. As I said this WC gives me the hope that things will get more interesting going forward.
zen Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 There is always C.T for it. Even in Soccer worldcup which is lot more competitive obviously,teams like Saudi Arabia,North Korea had qualified in the past despite being way below the standard. Some other minnow teams have raised their game as well. As I said this WC gives me the hope that things will get more interesting going forward. CT does not give an opportunity for associates to qualify, does it? And CT's format is different from what I suggested
BlueBee Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 I'm in favor of Associates. They'll improve from playing these types of tournaments. As for Non-Associate league, Champions Trophy is there.
sourab10forever Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 They must.but not in the current format. 4 Groups for 3 each must be formed.That makes it 12 teams.So Top 4 associates will get a chance. Then top 2 from each round qualifies and plays round robin match in super 8's
fineleg Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 Keep ODI WC to major teams ONLY plus max 2 associates. WC should be a marquee tournament. This elongated WC is boring. Use T20 WC for all of the expansion, and maybe CT if ODIs needed.
Stuge Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 They must.but not in the current format. 4 Groups for 3 each must be formed.That makes it 12 teams.So Top 4 associates will get a chance. Then top 2 from each round qualifies and plays round robin match in super 8's remember 2007 ? This is the reason ICC is going with the current format as suggested by BCCI :P
sourab10forever Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 remember 2007 ? This is the reason ICC is going with the current format as suggested by BCCI :P Doesn't get easier for the Top 6 teams to squeez in through to QF.Even if they are in there worst form.
Stuge Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 Don;t be surprised if Ireland qualifies for Quarter Finals
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