Is it just me who'll miss the Champions Trophy when it's gone?

[Furball]

Clearly, back in the mid 00s before the advent of the World T20, having the Champions Trophy every 2 years was complete overkill.

However, it's a great wee tournament when it's held every 4 years. Doesn't drag on forever but you tend to get great contests and the format lends a bit of tension even for the first round of games. It's a far superior event to the overblown World Cup with its daft formats to squeeze in as many games as possible for TV.

 

[Spark]

The first few editions were the absolute pits in terms of format and quality, but yeah, the current version with just the 8 teams and lasting a fortnight or so is great. Really intense contests with almost every game being significant.

 

[Dan]

The format of this tournament has worked quite well so far - every game has meaning, it isn't drawn out over six decades like the world cup and the cricket has been pretty decent.

While it arguably serves no real purpose, it's a nice fun tournament to have occasionally.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Yeah, I'll miss it. ODIs have their own cadence when teams manage to give a **** about them. Very different from Tests and certainly far superior to T20s.

 

[Spikey]

I wonder if it would have worked more if it stuck in the one location and time of year (eg england and now) for every tournament. probably wasn't feasible of course

 

[Maximas]

A good range of matches so far too, a high scoring one, a couple of low scoring thrillers and then a more normal game, great cricket.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

If they had used this format of 8 teams and a few weeks in the previous competitions then I doubt it would be being got rid of. The fact they messed it up by having too many meaningless games meant it was just another poor competition. The current one is working well and very interesting. Shame it the last one.

Maybe the 20/20 could use the same format in future and be worth watching.

 

[Spark]

Format's exactly the same as the last one IIRC. Thought that was a half-decent tournament, though certainly less interesting as this one is much, much more open.

ODIs have their own cadence when teams manage to give a **** about them. Very different from Tests and certainly far superior to T20s.

Yeah, definitely agree with this.

 

[Cabinet96]

This and the previous edition in 2009 have been and were really good. I'll definitely be sad when it finishes.

I also think these sort of tournaments are exactly what ODI cricket needs as well, as it adds importance to it. I mean, ODI cricket would just have been a back thought in a double Ashes year for a side like England if it wasn't there, but they've really been focusing on it a lot lately as a result and even series like the NZ one just passed have seemed really important. I don't like the fact that they're converting into a test championship as I don't think test cricket needs a multi team tournament. All tests are important, and I wouldn't really care about them more if they were in a whole test championship. ODI's are completely different though and there's more benefit to be had from these sorts of tournaments IMO.

If they had used this format of 8 teams and a few weeks in the previous competitions then I doubt it would be being got rid of. The fact they messed it up by having too many meaningless games meant it was just another poor competition. The current one is working well and very interesting. Shame it the last one.

Maybe the 20/20 could use the same format in future and be worth watching.

It pretty much does after the initial group stages, they just include Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and a couple of associates. They're usually out of it in a couple of days and the super 8 groups and semi's work just like this tournament does.

 

[Kippax]

The absolute scrimp 'n save international feed, maximising those margins by employing Simon Doull, mooching off the Sky UK graphics and just hazarding a guess at what it all signifies, even a one-wicket thriller last night felt about as abject and dreary as watching a Cricket Ireland Youtube broadcast. So no, I won't really miss it.

 

[Howe_zat]

It's a nice tourney but for me it's suffered a bit this year by being an Ashes prelude. Throw in the Lions tour on top of that and it's just ended up a fair way down the list

 

[Furball]

I hope it stays. The proposed Test Championship idea is beyond dire.

 

[Stapel]

For me its 1 Tests, 2 T20, 3 one-dayers. Doesn't mean I enjoy this tournament a lot so far.

I hope it stays. The proposed Test Championship idea is beyond dire.

It still can't believe a Test Championship will ever happen. Indeed far far far beyond dire.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah I don't begrudge the smaller sides getting a go in the WC but this a nice tasty alternative in its current guise.

 

[Stapel]

Yeah I don't begrudge the smaller sides getting a go in the WC but this a nice tasty alternative in its current guise.

For the associate members, T20 is far more interesting anyway.

 

[Furball]

For the World Cup it should be 4 groups of 4 followed by quarter finals. Super 8s, 6s or whatever are complete ****.

 

[Uppercut]

For the associate members, T20 is far more interesting anyway.

Nah I completely disagree.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

For the World Cup it should be 4 groups of 4 followed by quarter finals. Super 8s, 6s or whatever are complete ****.

Agreed, adds a pointless week to the competition at least as well.

 

[wpdavid]

Clearly, back in the mid 00s before the advent of the World T20, having the Champions Trophy every 2 years was complete overkill.

However, it's a great wee tournament when it's held every 4 years. Doesn't drag on forever but you tend to get great contests and the format lends a bit of tension even for the first round of games. It's a far superior event to the overblown World Cup with its daft formats to squeeze in as many games as possible for TV.

Yup, the CT has become way superior to the WC. I've never bought the argument that shedloads of mismatches in the WC is fine because there's normally one upset somewhere in the mix, but we've had this discussion before. A way of organising a tournament with 12 sides would probably be the best of both worlds, and it shoudn't be beyond the wit of the ICC to come up with it.

 

[Cabinet96]

Agreed, adds a pointless week to the competition at least as well.

Doesn't really add a pointless weak, at least for the teams anyway. The Super 8's can be tough to get out of and are competitive.

Realistically, the ICC aren't going to do the WC like Furball suggested, because they want as many matches and money they can get. So it's either super 8's, or massive groups where it's obvious which sides are going to go through, like group A in the last World Cup, and frankly I'd rather have the super 8's.