2015 World Cup: 10 teams and no associates

[Furball]

Not scared per say, but being cautious. seriously I feel a team should not be eliminated because of one bad day against a lesser team. There should be an option for that team to come back and that shows the resolve of the team and what they are made of.

They have 2 further group games to do so - something which both India and Pakistan failed to do in 2007. Both were deservedely eliminated after losing 2 of their initial 3 group games. They didn't lose because of "one bad day" - they were eliminated because they weren't good enough.

Incidentally, one of India's triumphs this time around was really raising their game and winning when it mattered most, which made them very worthy champions this year.

Collosal waste of time. So if you want to conduct a plate league, Why not do that as the pre-cursor to the tournament?

It's not a waste of time - it guarantees all teams a minimum of 6 games. It's a collosal waste of time for the Associate players to take time off work and fly halfway around the world to be eliminated after 3 games. Give them a showpiece tournament to play for and make their time worthwhile.

 

[Borges]

So if you want to conduct a plate league, Why not do that as the pre-cursor to the tournament?

Because then we wouldn't be able to have the pleasure of watching India play Pakistan in the plate final for the coveted ninth place.

Why, oh, why didn't they think of this plate idea in 2007? Might have salvaged the TV ratings too.

 

[four_or_six]

Because then we wouldn't be able to have the pleasure of watching India play Pakistan in the plate final for the coveted ninth place.

Now that would have been funny.

 

[gvenkat]

Because then we wouldn't be able to have the pleasure of watching India play Pakistan in the plate final for the coveted ninth place.

Why, oh, why didn't they think of this plate idea in 2007? Might have salvaged the TV ratings too.

That's not even funny..

 

[fredfertang]

Have fired off the following to the ECB:

You've convinced me

That's not even funny..

'tis mildly amusing though

 

[gvenkat]

They have 2 further group games to do so - something which both India and Pakistan failed to do in 2007. Both were deservedely eliminated after losing 2 of their initial 3 group games. They didn't lose because of "one bad day" - they were eliminated because they weren't good enough.

Incidentally, one of India's triumphs this time around was really raising their game and winning when it mattered most, which made them very worthy champions this year.



It's not a waste of time - it guarantees all teams a minimum of 6 games. It's a collosal waste of time for the Associate players to take time off work and fly halfway around the world to be eliminated after 3 games. Give them a showpiece tournament to play for and make their time worthwhile.

In 2007 India lost to SL and Pak lost to WI, In your words they are not "Good Enough" however those two were not upsets, however the Bangladesh and Ireland results were upsets. Going by your theory in 2011, England were not good enough but they were given the chance to come back and they did against the WI. That is what I'm trying to say here.

It's a collosal waste of time for the Associate players to take time off work and fly halfway around the world to be eliminated after 3 games.

So going by the logic it's ok for professional cricketers to get eliminated after 3 games. You are contradicting yourself here

 

[Furball]

In 2007 India lost to SL and Pak lost to WI, In your words they are not "Good Enough" however those two were not upsets, however the Bangladesh and Ireland results were upsets. Going by your theory in 2011, England were not good enough but they were given the chance to come back and they did against the WI. That is what I'm trying to say here.

I'm not sure about India's group, but given that the Ireland-Zimbabwe game ended in a tie, Pakistan would have ensured qualification had they beaten the West Indies. They didn't. They lost 2 of their 3 games - that's not good enough. No different to England this year - had we lost to the West Indies, India or South Africa, we'd have been on the plane home.

So going by the logic it's ok for professional cricketers to get eliminated after 3 games. You are contradicting yourself here

No I'm not. There's a massive difference between a professional and an amateur.

edit: professional cricketers will play hundreds of high level matches throughout their career. Associate cricketers, bar the select few who are good enough to earn contracts in England, won't. So doubling the number of games they'll play makes a huge difference.

 

[GIMH]

You couldn't have the plate tournament before the WC, because you don't know which teams are going to be knocked out

 

[Furball]

You've convinced me

Do I detect some sarcasm?

 

[marc71178]

Have to say GF's idea is actually a good one if you want that many teams in.

One things for sure 2 groups of 6 sending 4 through to another round robin is not a good idea by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[fredfertang]

Do I detect some sarcasm?

There was certainly none intended

 

[Jacknife]

The only problem with any qualifying, is the crazy fixture list that already exists and then if it could be fitted in, where do you play the games ie, home and away or neutral venues or do you draw them out of the hat, like a FA cup type thing.
On the subject of the ECB, I've not read anything except rumor regarding them objecting along with BBCI and CA, but I've also read that NZ and Bang and Zim cricket boards also wanted this 10 team format.

 

[vcs]

Have fired off the following to the ECB:

Good man.

 

[gvenkat]

Have to say GF's idea is actually a good one if you want that many teams in.

One things for sure 2 groups of 6 sending 4 through to another round robin is not a good idea by any stretch of the imagination.

The 12 team format with 4 qualifying and split in to two can be easily done.

A1, B2, A3, B4 in on pool and the games can be played only against teams that have not already played.

 

[gvenkat]

The only problem with any qualifying, is the crazy fixture list that already exists and then if it could be fitted in, where do you play the games ie, home and away or neutral venues or do you draw them out of the hat, like a FA cup type thing.
On the subject of the ECB, I've not read anything except rumor regarding them objecting along with BBCI and CA, but I've also read that NZ and Bang and Zim cricket boards also wanted this 10 team format.

The qualifying has to be in Aus and NZL to meet the exact conditions. 9,10 and the three associates should only be 10 games and should not be that big a deal.

 

[Furball]

The qualifying has to be in Aus and NZL to meet the exact conditions. 9,10 and the three associates should only be 10 games and should not be that big a deal.

I still see no reason why England and the West Indies in particular shouldn't be in this qualifying tournament.

 

[Howe_zat]

That's a quality email, Furball.

Personally, I'm still bothered by 6-team groups at any stage because I think what really kills the WC atmosphere is games where there's very little riding on individual matches. I'd prefer a format similar to the World T20 or the European championships in football.

The only problem with any qualifying, is the crazy fixture list that already exists and then if it could be fitted in, where do you play the games ie, home and away or neutral venues or do you draw them out of the hat, like a FA cup type thing.
On the subject of the ECB, I've not read anything except rumor regarding them objecting along with BBCI and CA, but I've also read that NZ and Bang and Zim cricket boards also wanted this 10 team format.

This is a good point, I doubt there are many cricket fans keen on clogging the schedules even further. However, when it comes to getting rid of ODIs I'd say the pointless 5 and 7-match series would be a good place to start.

 

[gvenkat]

I still see no reason why England and the West Indies in particular shouldn't be in this qualifying tournament.

It can be either 8,9 or 6,7,8,9. There has to be a number that we need to decide on. But that would mean too many games.

Another ideal situation would be to scrap the champions trophy and replace that with these qualifiers.

 

[gvenkat]

That's a quality email, Furball.

Personally, I'm still bothered by 6-team groups at any stage because I think what really kills the WC atmosphere is games where there's very little riding on individual matches. I'd prefer a format similar to the World T20 or the European championships in football.



This is a good point, I doubt there are many cricket fans keen on clogging the schedules even further. However, when it comes to getting rid of ODIs I'd say the pointless 5 and 7-match series would be a good place to start.

Yep that is a good point.

 

[Teja.]

Job well done, Furball.