Tiger80 Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 I don't understand why ICC kept repeating this stupid format.group stages win nothing . 1992 format was best , I don't understand why they never repeated it. 75-87 format were also very excellent , even matches with minnows were important .
AmreekanDesi Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 what annoys me more than anything is how the ICC treats it as a joke with a new format every time it devalues the tournament greatly if there is no one standardized format. how can someone not a fan of cricke take sth seriously when he hears abt this fifa wc has been similar for decades.
Cricketics Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 I actually liked the 1999 world cup format barring the points carried to Super Six stage. Top 3 from each group went to super six and then there in super six, they battled with top 3 from other group and eventually top 4 were picked for semis. This was a great format and tested and made sure top 2 teams land in the final by playing all possible tough scenarios. Kept the world cup really interesting.
Zero_Unit Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 For me the best format was the one when every team played everyone. Then top 4 goes to semi and then top 2 to final. That's the best way to know who is the best team around. All these first round matches are super useless.
cowboysfan Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 too many minnow games together,atleast they could have got the schedule right but thats not the case.
Raghav_12 Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 I don't understand why ICC kept repeating this stupid format.group stages win nothing . 1992 format was best , I don't understand why they never repeated it. 75-87 format were also very excellent , even matches with minnows were important . 1992 format undoubtedly was best. But you can't go with that format with more than 10 teams. In case of 12 teams that format would lead to 70 matches in comparison to 49 matches that we have as of now and that accommodates 14 teams. Again 75-87 formats are not feasible because of increased numbers of teams. In any case, current format is crap. Group matches are as meaningless as ay in okay.
Rajiv Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 So the chintu mintu teams should have their own WC, auto qualify
Zero_Unit Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 too many minnow games together' date='atleast they could have got the schedule right but thats not the case.[/quote'] This is certainly true. The first day you have NZ vs SRI followed by AUS vs ENG. It should have been 2 strong team vs 2 weak teams. Makes the format more interesting to watch. Today you had Bang Vs AFG and then followed by Zim vs Uae not the best crowd pulling day.
Cricketics Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 This is certainly true. The first day you have NZ vs SRI followed by AUS vs ENG. It should have been 2 strong team vs 2 weak teams. Makes the format more interesting to watch. Today you had Bang Vs AFG and then followed by Zim vs Uae not the best crowd pulling day. Apparently, they did good on picking the venues. Yesterday the ground looked 70 percent packed. Yes, small stadium but there were lot of Bangladeshi and Afghan supporters watching. Australia and New Zealand have smartly arranged the schedule and venues, making sure the stadiums do not look empty when neutral teams are playing and especially when Associates are playing. Something hard to expect from other organizations.
G_B_ Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 what annoys me more than anything is how the ICC treats it as a joke with a new format every time it devalues the tournament greatly if there is no one standardized format. how can someone not a fan of cricke take sth seriously when he hears abt this fifa wc has been similar for decades. Its also been a much older competition. It initially started in the 1930s under a vastly different format. Even now they are talking about extending it from 32 to 48 to accommodate the likes of India and China for commercial reasons. The 2007 world cup sucked funds out of the icc cause Pak and India clash did not happen. They are not going to make the same mistake again. Maybe if you feel the format sucks fans need to send a message to the ICC that regardless of how well India does , we will tune in no matter what. Its not aimed at people on this forum but the everyday fan from India.
G_B_ Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 and fans really need to stop moaning. Dont compare it to FIFA world cup. There is so much depth in football. Cricket with effectively 8 officially (on paper) strong teams cannot be compared in the same bracket. Compare cricket to another game like rugby union. That too has about 8-9 strong teams.
vijay50 Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 I don't understand why ICC kept repeating this stupid format.group stages win nothing . 1992 format was best , I don't understand why they never repeated it. 75-87 format were also very excellent , even matches with minnows were important . To go back to 1992 format, bangla poyz , Zimboks and others minnows has to sit out. One option to consider is to allow minnows in Champions trophy and make the format similar to this WC and choose the teams which play QF to play in real WC in 1992 format. This would allow minnows to have 4-5 matches in each pool and if they are good they can always make QF and subsequently play real world cup.
brendan07 Posted February 19, 2015 Posted February 19, 2015 10 teams get automatic qualification Australia England India Pakistan West Indies South Africa Banglandesh Sri Lanka New Zealand Ireland Then have a mini World cup tournament BEFORE the tournament for the minnows. Top 2 gain entry, the rest go home. 1 in each group. Top 3 in each group go through to the Super Sixes. Top 2 qualify for the SF's in each group. Simple and realistic. Get it done.
Asim Posted February 19, 2015 Posted February 19, 2015 2007 format was actually good based on idea of removing all of boring round-1 games but just 2 upset matches ruined the whole thing. Round 2 was supposed to have top 8 teams each of them playing 6 games but Ireland and BD sneaking in there, fair enough they qualified on merit, but destroyed whole of round-2. In 13 games out of 24 we have either BD or Ireland as one side :D Imagine if it was Pak and india qualifying, we might have had 2007 been remembered as best format ever...
CG Posted February 19, 2015 Posted February 19, 2015 This is the best format Possible.I like knockout rounds like quaterfinals.
AmreekanDesi Posted February 19, 2015 Posted February 19, 2015 Another great format would be to have the same group stage but nstead of QF's you directly go the SF. So only top 2 from each group advances And every match will be a live match. No dead matches
bowl_out Posted February 19, 2015 Posted February 19, 2015 They should do an Eliminator format like IPL League stage with 14 or even 16 teams split in 2 Groups... Top 4 from each group qualify for playoffs... ELIMINATOR : A3 vs B4 - E1 (Winner) B3 vs A4 - E2 (Winner) QUARTER FINAL : A2 vs E1 - QFW1 (Winner) B2 vs E2 - QFW2 (Winner) SEMI FINAL : A1 vs QFW1 - F1 (Winner) A2 vs QFW2 - F2 (Winner) FINAL : F1 vs F2 - Winner (Champions) Advantages: - Teams have an incentive to finish on the top in the League stage, as A1 and B1 qualify directly into the semis - Teams finishing 3 and 4 in either group have to win 4 knockout matches instead of 3 in the current format. Hence, they will take all matches seriously, hence making the league matches interesting. - Fewer upsets like A4 beating B1 and so on. - Number of matches remains the same. PS: This was also mentioned in a Cricinfo article. Don't have the link though
Sonix768 Posted February 19, 2015 Posted February 19, 2015 1999 format is best.. 12 teams , 2 groups. Then Super 6. Then semis and Final. And come to think of it, 2014 T20 WC format also good.. First round involves only minnows so you consider that as a kind of qualifier tournament. Then 2 from that qualifies to join the big teams in Super 10 which makes 2 groups of 5. Then top 2 goes to semis. Less number of Minnows v Big sides, which would more often than not lead to one sided matches. And the qualifiers can be fun as they'll be fought between equally matched sided.. Remember Netherlands carnages against Ireland in the last T20 WC?
bowl_out Posted February 19, 2015 Posted February 19, 2015 2007 format was actually good based on idea of removing all of boring round-1 games but just 2 upset matches ruined the whole thing. Round 2 was supposed to have top 8 teams each of them playing 6 games but Ireland and BD sneaking in there' date=' fair enough they qualified on merit, but destroyed whole of round-2. In 13 games out of 24 we have either BD or Ireland as one side :D Imagine if it was Pak and india qualifying, we might have had 2007 been remembered as best format ever...[/quote'] Agree. It looked awesome on paper, but backfired very badly. Ultimately turned out to be the worst format.
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