Ram Posted March 25, 2015 Author Posted March 25, 2015 So' date=' are you trying to tell us that no sporting bodies know to run global sport events?[/quote'] Rhetorical question that has zero consequence to the central debate here..
Donal Cozzie Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 Sorry, you have to try better. I am not going to have my cricket watching experience ruined by a bunch of accountants from Scotland or a collection of construction workers from Afghanistan. I need every stage of a 6-7 week long tournament to be of some consequence to the ultimate result. Who is forcing you to watch them? Why make it last 6-7 weeks?? Why so narrow minded?? And how are they ruining it? You upset that those pesky Associates are actually improving? Had India come up with the kind of BS current growing teams do these days you wouldnt even have a team today
BeautifulGame Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 How about FIFA WC then? Why should I concerned with sporting events that i dont follow or care for?
Donal Cozzie Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 Sorry, you have to try better. I am not going to have my cricket watching experience ruined by a bunch of accountants from Scotland or a collection of construction workers from Afghanistan. This says it all really. Smug attitude, hilariously misinformed (most of those teams are professional) and bad for the game itself. Not to mention he brushes off a perfectly reasonable idea with one line because like most people with his views he knows his arguments will be destroyed so he doesnt even bother. But hey why should he care once he has his flashily named knockouts. Super duper semi final playoff promotion eliminator decider no.3. Now with more filler. I've done my work here on this thread. Adios
Ram Posted March 25, 2015 Author Posted March 25, 2015 Who is forcing you to watch them? Why make it last 6-7 weeks?? Why so narrow minded?? And how are they ruining it? You upset that those pesky Associates are actually improving? Had India come up with the kind of BS current growing teams do these days you wouldnt even have a team today You whole ‘theory’ – And I am using the term extremely liberally here – rests on the premise that having associate teams filled with part-time cricketers who otherwise regular 9-5 jobs to pay for groceries can be uplifted by having them be part of a global event every 4 years.. This seems to indicate you have little to know knowledge or insight on how good quality cricketers are produced over the long term.
Sidhoni Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 Semis and final have to be one and done knockouts. We can have super 6 instead of quarters though.
Donal Cozzie Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 You whole ‘theory’ – And I am using the term extremely liberally here – rests on the premise that having associate teams filled with part-time cricketers who otherwise regular 9-5 jobs to pay for groceries can be uplifted by having them be part of a global event every 4 years.. This seems to indicate you have little to know knowledge or insight on how good quality cricketers are produced over the long term. Even though Ireland are fully professional. Even though Afghanistan are fully professional. Even though Scotland are fully professional. Hell even Nepal are professional and paid to be cricketers. And I have little knowledge. Lulz. Anyway, this will be my final post (I just couldnt let that misinformed comment slide). Enjoy your pipe dream of a knock out that isnt really a knock out system
zen Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 Ideally, every match should be like a KO :orderorder: .... Safety nets probably are what makes tournaments boring (and long) The format that I prefer: Teams - 8 Group Stage - RR SF - 2nd vs 3rd F - #1 in group stage (award for winning the group stage) vs. winner of SF Qualifications (if associates are to be included) * Defending Champion * Host / Hosts * Remaining top 2-3 teams * final 2-3 spots based on qualification games on home and away matches b/w the lower ranked ODI sides and Associates OR a mini-WC before the main event :woot: In this way, there are no free passes. Every game is important including winning the group (and prevents teams from just playing to be in the top 3-4 to qualify for SF). Lower ranked teams have to prove themselves and fight it out with Associates too :icflove:
BeautifulGame Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 You whole theory And I am using the term extremely liberally here rests on the premise that having associate teams filled with part-time cricketers who otherwise regular 9-5 jobs to pay for groceries can be uplifted by having them be part of a global event every 4 years.. This seems to indicate you have little to know knowledge or insight on how good quality cricketers are produced over the long term. Actually mate apart from UAE every other associate team in this world cup is fully professional. Your views r very narrow minded .Put it simply an 8 team is not a world cup .Not in any sport . What we need is to increase the quality of the associates by helping them grow cricket .That's what ICC fault is not restricting even further
coffee_rules Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 Super 6s is better, may be with 6 teams in each group get 2 groups - 12 teams Top 3 in each play Top 3 in a RR Pick top 4 in Semis This way some teams who lose to top teams don't get KOed ..still get a chance to redeem.
Cricketics Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 My idea for Ram and ICC which will be fair for all the associate teams who do not get proper chance to qualify or play enough cricket against top 8 teams. ICC should take a leaf out of ATP and use their format. They have a qualifying tournament in every grandslam. So here is the idea. Right before the world cup, at the same venue where the world cup is taking place, there should be a pre tournament Basically you can call this Round 1 of world cup or Pre tournament - Qualifying round. Just like Tennis grandslams Ranked 9-16 teams participate here in 2 groups of 4. Top 2 teams from each group qualify. Hence giving us top 4 teams which are best and in form. Now these 4 teams who just qualified have already had enough match practice going into the super 12, just like a qualifyer having won 3 rounds, often is as good as his round 1 opponent in tennis Now all 4 teams are slotted into 2 groups with other top 8 teams, thus giving 6 teams per group. From these two groups, the ranked 1 team of each group qualifies for semi final, and the other ranked 3-6 team play a kock out game between them to earn the semi final spot Next stage is semi final which will be followed by the final.
BeautifulGame Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 The current format is good .The problem is length of the tournament .Could have easily solved that by playing 2 matches a day but TV revenue restricted that If anything the GS were memorable becoz of associates. Afghanistan vs Srl and Scotland UAE vs Ireland and Zim ,Ire vs Zim were the enjoyable matches Almost every match BTW top 8 team apart from Aus vs NZl was a mismatch
Crookbond Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 Rhetorical question that has zero consequence to the central debate here.. It does - just that you refuse to accept it. A global sport even has been run by multiple bodies apart from the ICC in the exact same knockout manner. The direct answer to your question is - a knockout format decides the true winner. A team that is able to consistently win three-four games on the trot despite the knowledge that it would be their last is the team that can execute their skills is a winner.
addicted4444 Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 Funny thing is if the OP's wishes had been true, India would never have won the 83 WC, the country would never have generated the massive following for cricket that the 83 WC led to, and this forum would probably never have existed for the OP to complain about the WC format. Knockouts are far better because they test the ability to perform under tremendous pressure (something SA has historically failed) and provide insane amounts of drama and excitement which a league system or a multi game knockout never could. While O agree with the OP that the ICC doesn't know how to organize tournaments, I hope they don't go looking to him for answers because his are even worse.
addicted4444 Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 The current format is good .The problem is length of the tournament .Could have easily solved that by playing 2 matches a day but TV revenue restricted that If anything the GS were memorable becoz of associates. Afghanistan vs Srl and Scotland UAE vs Ireland and Zim ,Ire vs Zim were the enjoyable matches Almost every match BTW top 8 team apart from Aus vs NZl was a mismatch Completely agreed with everything here. This post should be posted at the top of every thread complaining about the WC.
addicted4444 Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 Just look at what the American sports franchizes are doing. The NBA, NHL and MLB all have ‘best of x’ formats in their playoffs to determine winners. Every playoff series is like a mini-move on its own, with a plot, sub-plot and a twist. It’s what the players love and the fans yearn for. Btw, this one is funny because it completely refutes itself with even slightly closer examination. Noticed how you missed the biggest and most popular sport in the US, I.e. The NFL? Oh yeah, the NFL playoffs which are th most watched, enjoyed, talked about and rich sporting event in the US is a purely knockout tournament. And do you know why the other sports have multi game postseason series (where they keep increasing the number of games)? Because the number of teams making it into the postseason, combined with its length and the massive number of games played in it means that hardly anyone watches the regular season anymore, so those leagues have to keep increasing the number of postseason games at the expense of the regular season which has largely already been destroyed.
AmreekanDesi Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 not having knockout games takes out the whoe point of pressure games wc should test quality under pressure and this is what WC does and where the choking concept comes in
dial_100 Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 Sri, It will kill the whole excitement of so called "Upset". The element of surprised will totally diminish and all we will have is a current TOP teams making it to the top. Look, what you do on a day does matter most in the life as well. If you want to WIN it, do it on that day. Nobody has a whole life to wait for the format you suggested. With the current format, eventually, it does get worked out right for everybody. Even weather factor should be kept as a surprise element. It makes it more challenging. The current format adds lot of passion, adrenaline, extreme reactions etc to the game. Once everybody learns that they have a second or third chance, all of the above will be lost. What exactly are you trying to achieve here?
Crookbond Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 I find this amusing - cherry pick the sports you want NBA, NHL and MLB (which are totally different from a World Cup format btw) but ignore the ones which don't suit your theory - NFL, FIFA, Hockey etc. then move on to make a generalization that ICC doesn't know to run a global tournament. Common!
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