The Points Table/Standings

[Andyhere]

It would be something like this:
Group A
India
Australia
Pakistan
Bangladesh
Netherlands
W Indies

Group B
England
NZ
S Africa
Sri Lanka
Afghanistan
Ireland

Any defeats would be a significant blow to qualifying.

Yes this format will be fiercely competitive, but the issue is every team won't be able to play all the other teams atleast once.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

These early matches don't have any jeopardy on them. I'm an England fan, the defeat against NZ, whilst disappointing, doesn't feel in any way terminal but it should do.

I noticed after the Australia - India game, a few of the Aussie players were laughing away with some Indian players. I'm not knocking the Aussie players here, but they know a defeat to India isn't that damaging. In WC cricket, every defeat should really matter.

This is a weird argument, a defeat is exactly the same whether it happens now or later. Losing now just means you have extra pressure at the back end. If you want every defeat to matter just make every game a straight knockout.

 

[honestbharani]

I think it is the ICC"s greed that has led to this BUT having every team play each other once is about as fair a format as you can get for such a tournament. Other arguements like it goes on for too long etc have more merit when it comes to discussing the issues with this current format but when it comes to being fair, this is as fair as it can be IMO.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

The only disadvantage is that there are less minnows who can qualify (eat my arse Molehill) since 10 teams is probably the maximum that this format will work for.

 

[honestbharani]

The only disadvantage is that there are less minnows who can qualify (eat my arse Molehill) since 10 teams is probably the maximum that this format will work for.

Yeah and that is why I said it's ICC's greed that got us here.

I am all for the 2011 format tbh. 12 test teams automatically qualify and we get 2 more associates playing.

 

[Prince EWS]

I'm not a massive fan of the format - let's be honest it's all about money. The more matches, the higher the TV rights.

These early matches don't have any jeopardy on them. I'm an England fan, the defeat against NZ, whilst disappointing, doesn't feel in any way terminal but it should do.

I noticed after the Australia - India game, a few of the Aussie players were laughing away with some Indian players. I'm not knocking the Aussie players here, but they know a defeat to India isn't that damaging. In WC cricket, every defeat should really matter.

The tournament won't really come alive until the last few rounds of group games, when some defeats will really hurt teams.

I'd have 2 groups of 6 - the 10 teams in this WC plus say the W Indies and Ireland.

Any defeat then really hits home
but of course there would be considerably fewer matches and less TV rights money in the coffers.

And to the powers that be - that's all that really matters.

Extra two teams would be Scotland and Zimbabwe based on the qualifiers, ftr.

WC is expanding to 14 teams next time so we should probably bake that in to any formatting plans. Two groups of 7?

 

[ataraxia]

My preferred format is two groups of 8 then a highly shortened super six then semis. I imagine in 2027 we'll see two groups of 7, and possible straight semi-finals from there. The ICC don't exactly seem keen to have the ODI WC continue to be the pinnacle, with loads of games.

 

[ankitj]

WC is expanding to 14 teams next time so we should probably bake that in to any formatting plans. Two groups of 7?

Yes, this has been done before.

 

[straw man]

I like the idea of a group stage followed by a Super-6s mini-tournament in principle, however carrying forward either all your group stage points, or only those from other teams that progress, can lead to outcomes that.. aren't great. The former means a team qualifying from a weak group gets an extra advantage, while a group-stage washout vs a minnow continues to affect you all the way through the Super 6s. The latter means if you beat and knock out a top-tier team in the group stage then you take nothing through to the next round for it.

The alternative - to replay in the Super-6s the matches between teams qualifying from the same group - is going to stretch things out too far.

So I'm not sure if there is any Super-6 format that I like in practice.

 

[centurymaker]

There should be no super 6.

Straight Semis.

or

2nd place vs 3rd place team in each group should faceoff to reach the semis, with 1st going through directly.

 

[Prince EWS]

My proposal for 2027, assuming we're stuck with 14 teams (I'd prefer more).

1. Two groups of seven.
2. Top three of each group progress.
3. Top your group? Straight to semis.
4. 2nd in Group A v 3rd in Group B; 2nd in Group B vs 3rd in Group A as preliminary final knockouts.
5. Semis: Initial group winners vs Preliminary Final winners.
6. Final.

I wouldn't mind only having two from each group progress and going straight to semis, but it can create too many dead rubbers towards the end in such big groups. Three is a good balance from groups of seven to qualify, and skipping an extra knockout and being able to rest your bowlers etc is still a big enough incentive for teams to want to finish top.

 

[straw man]

I would be fine with that.

 

[Days of Grace]

How about two groups of 8, followed by quarter finals, semi finals and a final?

The two finalists will end up playing 10 matches, the same as they will go in the current edition.

The trouble is, after rank 14 the quality gets pretty dire. Maybe 14 is the current sweet spot.

 

[number11]

This format is the best I feel. 10 teams is fine - sadly WI missed out, but else it is as reasonable as a format can be.

 

[Days of Grace]

I can’t help but feel that West Indies or Zimbabwe would have provided stiffer competition than Netherlands, though.

 

[Tom Flint]

How about two groups of 8, followed by quarter finals, semi finals and a final?

The two finalists will end up playing 10 matches, the same as they will go in the current edition.

The trouble is, after rank 14 the quality gets pretty dire. Maybe 14 is the current sweet spot.

Perfect

 

[centurymaker]

12 teams is probably better.

 

[Zinzan]

I can’t help but feel that West Indies or Zimbabwe would have provided stiffer competition than Netherlands, though.

It's mindboggling to think of all that IPL money spent on West Indies players and even when they have had close to their best available side (in the last decade), they've been ordinary at best.

 

[Prince EWS]

This format is the best I feel. 10 teams is fine - sadly WI missed out, but else it is as reasonable as a format can be.

You are a joke.

 

[number11]

You are a joke.

Well, that's a well reasoned post.