Format ideas for future World Cups.

[LA ICE-E]

Ireland were never in the game once England wriggled off the hook which a ODI-class team would almost certainly never have allowed them to do.

You vastly overrate their present, as well as having no clue about their past.

Really because i seen a lot of test teams letting their opposition "wriggled off the hook", and so are they not a test-class team? Im not overrating their present but simply saying they certainly deserve to be there and isn't devaluating the tournament and if they are then so are other teams like england, wi etc...but none of them are and all deserve to be there.

 

[Richard]

Really because i seen a lot of test teams letting their opposition "wriggled off the hook", and so are they not a test-class team?

Err, it happens only rarely. And it does happen a bit more in Tests, being a 2-innings game.

Im not overrating their present but simply saying they certainly deserve to be there and isn't devaluating the tournament and if they are then so are other teams like england, wi etc...but none of them are and all deserve to be there.

You are saying they can compete, which is grossly overrating them. Let's see how they do against the real sides. Their 2 games so far have been against Pakistan and England, both of whom were even worse than could have been expected.

 

[LA ICE-E]

Err, it happens only rarely. And it does happen a bit more in Tests, being a 2-innings game.

You are saying they can compete, which is grossly overrating them. Let's see how they do against the real sides. Their 2 games so far have been against Pakistan and England, both of whom were even worse than could have been expected.

they did compete in every game they played so far didn't they? they didn't get murdered in any...and even if you call them murders than look at the other games...the other competitive games were ireland vs zim, and sa vs aus(but thats the same like ireland vs england) and sa vs sri so not that much more competitive games there if you don't count irelands one.

 

[Richard]

Err, did I not just say wait and see until Ireland play the stronger sides?

 

[LA ICE-E]

well i dont know...but come on give the credit they deserve for doing well so far at least...they had sa for 98/8 in the warm ups(i know its just warm ups but still)...they just need more experience to finish games off

 

[Richard]

It's a warm-up. It's completely meaningless.

Let's wait and see how SA do against them in the game where there are points to be played for.

 

[LA ICE-E]

yeah, i know its meaning less but its not like SA didn't care a single bit...

 

[Richard]

It is. The outcome of that game was of absolutely no consequence whatsoever.

 

[SJS]

The issues are :

1. Current tournament is too big stretched over two months
2. There are more one sided matches than meaningful ones (almost)
3. There has to be chance for lesser nations to participate.

I think the tournament length should be halved. This cant be done without reducing the number of teams if some part of the tournament has to have a league format.

Suggestion :

Number of teams and qualification
1. Ten teams in the final leg of the tournament.
2. Reigning Champions, hosts and another five from the top of the ICC chart to qualify automaticallyfor the tournament proper or final leg.
3. Two teams to come through the first leg of the tournament in which all other members may be eligible to play.

Tournament Proper Format
1. Two groups of five teams with one qualifier in each to play on league basis. This means twenty matches.
2. Two leaders of the group games to play semi finals and then finals. Another three matchs.

This tournament will have ten playing days for the league phase. Twenty ifonly one group plays on a single day. This will mean the tournament ending in under three weeks.

I like the idea of a best of three finals but if the finals is best of three and the semi-final is a straight knock out that increases the importance of the semis in a way.

The gap between the first leg of the tournament (for two qualifiers) could be substantial but not more than six to eight months.

 

[LA ICE-E]

The issues are :

1. Current tournament is too big stretched over two months
2. There are more one sided matches than meaningful ones (almost)
3. There has to be chance for lesser nations to participate.

1.Nothing wrong with it being too, odi cricket is too big compared to other sports...
2.There are all together 15 one side games as opposed to other 31.
3. The lesser nations are participating

.
I think the tournament length should be halved. This cant be done without reducing the number of teams if some part of the tournament has to have a league format.

Yes it can, either by having 2 games a day for the super 8 two which would bring it down to a 27 days of games or having quarterfinals.

Suggestion :

Number of teams and qualification
1. Ten teams in the final leg of the tournament.
2. Reigning Champions, hosts and another five from the top of the ICC chart to qualify automaticallyfor the tournament proper or final leg.
3. Two teams to come through the first leg of the tournament in which all other members may be eligible to play.

Its not fair, either have all teams go through the qualifiers except host(like in fifa world cup) or let the test teams stay.

Tournament Proper Format
1. Two groups of five teams with one qualifier in each to play on league basis. This means twenty matches.
2. Two leaders of the group games to play semi finals and then finals. Another three matchs.

This tournament will have ten playing days for the league phase. Twenty ifonly one group plays on a single day. This will mean the tournament ending in under three weeks.

way too short.

I like the idea of a best of three finals but if the finals is best of three and the semi-final is a straight knock out that increases the importance of the semis in a way.

That's pretty stupid because then why not a best three out of semis...then it would be like what's the difference between this and the rankings? those are best something out of something..

The gap between the first leg of the tournament (for two qualifiers) could be substantial but not more than six to eight months.

two qualifiers? if you plan on that all teams are going to go through it then i guess thats ok but otherwise no. And all teams can't go through qualifiers because they play other international cricket which would have to be cut for them to play in qualifiers...

 

[Richard]

The issues are :

1. Current tournament is too big stretched over two months
2. There are more one sided matches than meaningful ones (almost)
3. There has to be chance for lesser nations to participate.

I think the tournament length should be halved. This cant be done without reducing the number of teams if some part of the tournament has to have a league format.

Suggestion :

Number of teams and qualification
1. Ten teams in the final leg of the tournament.
2. Reigning Champions, hosts and another five from the top of the ICC chart to qualify automaticallyfor the tournament proper or final leg.
3. Two teams to come through the first leg of the tournament in which all other members may be eligible to play.

Tournament Proper Format
1. Two groups of five teams with one qualifier in each to play on league basis. This means twenty matches.
2. Two leaders of the group games to play semi finals and then finals. Another three matchs.

This tournament will have ten playing days for the league phase. Twenty ifonly one group plays on a single day. This will mean the tournament ending in under three weeks.

I like the idea of a best of three finals but if the finals is best of three and the semi-final is a straight knock out that increases the importance of the semis in a way.

The gap between the first leg of the tournament (for two qualifiers) could be substantial but not more than six to eight months.

As I say - I like the idea of a pre-qualifying round a la the group-stage in the current tournament - just that you add the group-stage to the qualifiers that were already there.

This makes the tournament proper a shorter affair, with (if if all goes well) no games which are prospective one-siders. And it gives that oh-so-essential chance for the Bermudas of this World to mix it with the ODI-class sides.

 

[LA ICE-E]

As I say - I like the idea of a pre-qualifying round a la the group-stage in the current tournament - just that you add the group-stage to the qualifiers that were already there.

This makes the tournament proper a shorter affair, with (if if all goes well) no games which are prospective one-siders. And it gives that oh-so-essential chance for the Bermudas of this World to mix it with the ODI-class sides.

yeah but what if all doesn't go well and a country like india doesn't even make it to the finals tournament...then we would have to change the format again huh

 

[Richard]

Err, no - such a format would be a considerably larger incentive to teams like India not to take these fixtures lightly.

 

[LA ICE-E]

i dont think they took bangladesh lightly..but still lost..

 

[Richard]

There's no other explanation... other than that teams do occasionally have bad days.

 

[LA ICE-E]

but india had two bad days...not once...they lost to sri lank pretty bad..

 

[Richard]

Not really, Lanka are just a better team.

India had 1 bad day, when they lost to Bangladesh, a team they'd beat 19 times out of 20 if not more.

 

[LA ICE-E]

you keep changing your views...i'm pretty sure before you didn't count bangladesh as minnow any more but now you still treat them the same....If india didn't have a bad day against the lankans...then are you saying the india cant beat sri lanka on their good day? if that's the case they dont belong there even more...

 

[Prince EWS]

you keep changing your views

Did you just say that about Richard?

If there's one thing I never expected anyone to say about Richard...

 

[Richard]

you keep changing your views...i'm pretty sure before you didn't count bangladesh as minnow any more but now you still treat them the same....If india didn't have a bad day against the lankans...then are you saying the india cant beat sri lanka on their good day? if that's the case they dont belong there even more...

WTF? I'm saying nothing about this WC makes any impact on India, that much is blatantly obvious.

I've never, ever said Bangladesh have ceased to be a substandard side - at least not in the last 3 years. I've said umpteen times that I won't jump on the bandwagon the way almost everyone seems to do at the most fleeting of opportunities. I'll wait for genuine evidence.