my logic wasn't "every match should be exciting". My logic was - give all the teams a bit of room in the early stages - only the teams which can put up consistently good performances should go through to the next round. We want only the teams who can compete real well in the business end of the tournament , right ?Yes this sounds fair, like GeraintIsMyHero said every game should matter. Having 2 groups of 6-7 teams would allow test nations to take a day or two off which goes against your "every match should be exciting" logic.
when did I say minnows shouldn't be allowed to partake in the WC ? In which world does splitting 12 teams into 6 each instead of 4 each lead to minnows not being allowed to take part against stronger competition ?If minnows aren't allowed to partake in the WC against stronger competition, how can they make progress at the top level? If India weren't allowed to play in the 75 and 79 WC would they have won the 83 tournament since they only won 1 match in 6 games before 83. What about Sri Lanka excluded from all WC until 96 as they had only won 4 and lost 20 matches, would they have won 96?