Most profound World Cup Winners

[OverratedSanity]

Sachin winning it in his last attempt after a glorious career, having carried the team in previous world cups now getting carried by the team in the post match celebrations is very obviously the most poignant. 96 was much influential on cricket, it didn't have the same wholesome story. Everything else sucks.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Sachin winning it in his last attempt after a glorious career, having carried the team in previous world cups now getting carried by the team in the post match celebrations is very obviously the most poignant. 96 was much influential on cricket, it didn't have the same wholesome story. Everything else sucks.

Actually yes, 11 is one of the most poignant. The greatest play in ODI QC history getting his due, and that Dhoni six. Throughout that tournament you knew, it was just meant to be for India.

 

[honestbharani]

Give your reasoning.

Because it was more significant.

 

[subshakerz]

Both 92 and 2011 were poignant in retrospect as I see them as the culmination of the golden eras of Pakistan and India.

 

[Jumno]

83 didn't change cricket like 96 though.

Legacy of 96:
- Emergence of SL as a non-minnow
- Aggressive batting became norm, especially in early overs
- Subcontinent became the center of gravity of cricket fandom
- LOIs truly became the rival format to tests in terms of popularity

Greatbatch I'm sure started the aggressive opening approach in wc 1992

 

[Migara]

I agree with this, but the platform for it was set by 83, the initial boom in popularity in SC answer Ind especially, and for Ind personally, it was perhaps the first victory that put them on a final pedestal. Also heralded the end of ODIS as a format only dominated WI. 83 was the beginning of cricket becoming a sort of religion in India. Perhaps 96 did something similar for SL, but due to the size of Ind’s influence in cricket since then, I’d say 83.

India never dominated other sides as WC winners.
SL did. 96-98, we beat everyone fair and square.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Didn't SL get two walkovers

 

[Burgey]

Yeah, but they dominated those walk overs.

 

[subshakerz]

Greatbatch I'm sure started the aggressive opening approach in wc 1992

Agreed but 96 normalized/popularized it.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

India never dominated other sides as WC winners.
SL did. 96-98, we beat everyone fair and square.

I’m not saying Ind dominated those sides, but they were against much bigger odds. SL were a much better side, in 96, especially respective to other teams, than Ind were in 83. Also Sri Lanka went with a proper template and approach atleast. I chose 83, cause it was the beginning of cricket becoming a religion in India, and India becoming the dominating influence that it cricket today. It has its roots there, even though it would amplify with Sachin in the 90s.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

And post 83, Ind did become a dominating ODI country, winning Benson and Hedges in 85, and did very well in 87, and were one of the favourites. One of the reasons why the WC in 87 was in SC, was because of 83. So 83 pioneered cricket fandom in SC, and especially in Ind that way, to a massive extent. Whether Ind became as good as Sl post 96 is debatable, but not the point of this thread, but I chose 83 because I felt it was more influential in the sense, you can trace a line to 83, as the point which triggered Ind to become a major force in cricket and the financial status it enjoys today in the sport, as well as the beginning of the popularity of the sport there.

 

[subshakerz]

And post 83, Ind did become a dominating ODI country, winning Benson and Hedges in 85, and did very well in 87, and were one of the favourites. One of the reasons why the WC in 87 was in SC, was because of 83. So 83 pioneered cricket fandom in SC, and especially in Ind that way, to a massive extent. Whether Ind became as good as Sl post 96 is debatable, but not the point of this thread, but I chose 83 because I felt it was more influential in the sense, you can trace a line to 83, as the point which triggered Ind to become a major force in cricket and the financial status it enjoys today in the sport, as well as the beginning of the popularity of the sport there.

In the 80s though, even with the 83 WC, cricket was still seen as an Anglo Commonwealth sport. But fair enough it laid the foundation for changes later on.

I personally noticed a change post-96, by the time when India had taken off as an economic market and Pakistan, SL and India all had fairly good teams, that cricket became essentially a sport driven by the subcontinent.

But the even bigger change was the 96 WC created far more interest in LOIs.

 

[centurymaker]

But ODI format (particularly the World Cup) doesn't seem to have long left, as there's every chance that there may not be another ODI WC after 2027.

So eventually ODI WC wins and records will inevitably become redundant.

Future generations won't be talking about it.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

In the 80s though, even with the 83 WC, cricket was still seen as an Anglo Commonwealth sport. But fair enough it laid the foundation for changes later on.

I personally noticed a change post-96, by the time when India had taken off as an economic market and Pakistan, SL and India all had fairly good teams, that cricket became essentially a sport driven by the subcontinent.

But the even bigger change was the 96 WC created far more interest in LOIs.

Agree with the above, but with respect pioneering cricket fandom, especially in Ind and ind’s financial status in the game today, id chose 83.

 

[Jumno]

I'm sad for odi cricket, the romance and intrigue of it is dying.

The Sharjah cup days....

 

[centurymaker]

T20 format and even the T20 World Cup is still in its infancy. The format is still growing in established nations and much more so in newer nations. And 2028 LA Olympics could be huge for our sport and T20 format.

 

[Dazinho]

I've always thought the most important world cups have been those that have led to the emergence of a new nation.

Zimbabwe being the first obvious one, Kenya and Ireland later on.

Out of interest...how do cricket fans feel about the world cup itself? It just doesn't strike me as 'grabbing' people quite like the football or rugby union events do with fans of those sports.

 

[subshakerz]

I'm sad for odi cricket, the romance and intrigue of it is dying.

The Sharjah cup days....

I miss those Sharjah matches too.

 

[centurymaker]

I've always thought the most important world cups have been those that have led to the emergence of a new nation.

Zimbabwe being the first obvious one, Kenya and Ireland later on.

Out of interest...how do cricket fans feel about the world cup itself? It just doesn't strike me as 'grabbing' people quite like the football or rugby union events do with fans of those sports.

Cricket World Cup used to feel just like how the Rugby World Cup felt! It was rare and special.

But now a lot has changed in cricket. There's been a huge saturation. There are toooo many World Cups and World Titles nowadays.


In a four year cycle, there are 2 T20 World Cups, 1 ODI World Cup and 2 World Test Titles and 1 Champions Trophy as well!!

Compare this to before, when there was just the 1 ODI world cup! (plus champions trophy on the odd occasion).

Right now, it's seriously an overkill. Can't have 5-6 world titles handed out in 4 years and not expect a massive saturation.

 

[_Ed_]

The reduced number of teams in 2019 really took something away from it, IMO.