**2007 World Cup**

[Stefano]

I like this formula. For several reasons.

1) The World Cup is a great opportunity to pit together the best teams against the minor teams. Although Ireland, Scotland, Canada and Bermuda have gained the ODI status, I don't think they will play lots of games against Australia, England, India... The World Cup is important because it improves the level of the minor countries.

2) Who wins the World Cup MUST BE considered the best team in the world. Of course, not always does this happen. However, the more games you play, the more it is difficult to a weak team to advance. With this formula, you have to face all the best teams in order to win.

3) If you like a fast - exciting - breathtaking tournament, there is the ICC Championship Trophy: one loss and you are out. However, I would have problems to consider the ICC Championship Trophy's winner the best team in the world: it is such a fast tournament that luck has a too big impact. Everybody (even the mighty Australians) can have a bad day.

 

[marc71178]

Absolutely - 14 at the 2003 World Cup was pushing it. 16 is far too many IMO, 12 would be an adequate number with two groups and reasonable competition throughout.

16 is better than 14 IMO.

For a start, the top 8 all play against each other (reminds me of the 92 Cup formula generally agreed as the best one yet)

 

[Somerset]

16 is better than 14 IMO.

For a start, the top 8 all play against each other (reminds me of the 92 Cup formula generally agreed as the best one yet)

What's wrong with a top eight in a 12 or 14 team tournament then?

 

[aussie]

well the WC is just around the corner & i still belive that the squad i picked in a previous thread will be off to the caribbean in 2 years time:

1.Ricky Ponting - captain Age: 32 in 2007 world cup
2.Adam Gilchrist - w/keeper Age: 35 in 2007 world cup
3.Micheal Clarke Age: 26
4.Damien Martyn Age: 35
5.Andrew Symonds Age: 31
6.Micheal Hussey Age: 31
7.Brad Hodge Age: 32
8.Shane Watson Age: 25
9.James Hopes Age: 28
10.Brad Haddin - back up keeper Age: 29
11.Cameron White Age: 23
12.Brett Lee Age: 29
13.Jason Gillespie Age: 32
14.Damien Wright Age: 31
15.Glenn McGrath Age: 37

 

[Neil Pickup]

What's wrong with a top eight in a 12 or 14 team tournament then?

How the heck do you work that? 16 -> 8 is simple.

 

[Somerset]

How the heck do you work that? 16 -> 8 is simple.

Two groups of six = top four qualify...

 

[Neil Pickup]

Two groups of six = top four qualify...

Two groups of six = Thirty games
Four groups of four = Twenty four games

You get the eight together earlier this way!

 

[Somerset]

Yes but in 24 matches there are effectively only four that should be classed as competitive matches between the best sides. In the two groups of six, there are 12 competitive matches between the test playing nations (excluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh) even before the top eight begins.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Yes but in 24 matches there are effectively only four that should be classed as competitive matches between the best sides. In the two groups of six, there are 12 competitive matches between the test playing nations (excluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh) even before the top eight begins.

But you get these matches anyway in the Super Eights, as a section in its entireity rather than two subplots and truckloads of points carried forward. 12 -> 6 didn't work last time, did it?

 

[marc71178]

What's wrong with a top eight in a 12 or 14 team tournament then?

How would you schedule it from a 12 or a 14 team tournament?

 

[Somerset]

But you get these matches anyway in the Super Eights, as a section in its entireity rather than two subplots and truckloads of points carried forward. 12 -> 6 didn't work last time, did it?

That's because there were 14 teams last time.

If you would prefer an early tournament with no matches with meaning, except for one in each group where those two teams are effectively through anyway, that's fine. But I would certainly rather a tournament with competitive matches throughout the entire tournament, giving players to find form against worthy opponents before the major matches commence.

 

[Somerset]

How would you schedule it from a 12 or a 14 team tournament?

Are you talking about the top eight here? It would be a similar process to the four pool system in the 2007 World Cup, with 1st in A playing 4th in B and so on.

 

[marc71178]

By having 2 groups of 6, you'll have 9 games with no meaning in each group.

 

[marc71178]

Are you talking about the top eight here? It would be a similar process to the four pool system in the 2007 World Cup, with 1st in A playing 4th in B and so on.

No I mean if you have 12 or 14, how would you schedule the world cup (being you personally)

 

[Somerset]

By having 2 groups of 6, you'll have 9 games with no meaning in each group.

On the other hand you could look on the bright side and find there are triple the amount of games with definite meaning than in this World Cup.

 

[Somerset]

No I mean if you have 12 or 14, how would you schedule the world cup (being you personally)

I don't see what the schedule has to do with things particularly but I can't see it being overly difficult to construct...

 

[marc71178]

It would only serve to add a lot more meaningless games against the minnows, whilst adding precisely no games between the top 8 sides.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Yes but in 24 matches there are effectively only four that should be classed as competitive matches between the best sides. In the two groups of six, there are 12 competitive matches between the test playing nations (excluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh) even before the top eight begins.

By definition you're only going to get a few matches between the best sides in the early stages, it is unavoidable in a true World Cup - ie one that offers ALL teams from around the World some qualification places, not just the elite 8.

 

[Somerset]

By definition you're only going to get a few matches between the best sides in the early stages, it is unavoidable in a true World Cup - ie one that offers ALL teams from around the World some qualification places, not just the elite 8.

I admit that with a twelve team World Cup would not represent a truely global event - but at the end of the day, cricket is not a truely global sport until the minor nations can compete with the test playing nations. And if one minor country is good enough, it should gain that 12th spot either way.

 

[Somerset]

It would only serve to add a lot more meaningless games against the minnows, whilst adding precisely no games between the top 8 sides.

The minnows in a 16 team tournament would play 20 games in total, whilst in a 12 team tournament, would feature in 18 if I'm not mistaken - many of which would be more competitive involving the minnows because there are no 13th-16th ranked sides, with only one non-test or official ODI playing team.