Rank the World Cups from best to worst

[Starfighter]

The length of the tournament could be fixed by having multiple games on a day. That would cut two weeks off at least.

That's too radical an idea for anything but the IPL to adopt.

 

[Bijed]

That's a very boring flip side

Important for those on Cricket Forums a few eyars down the line though, tbf

 

[91Jmay]

That's too radical an idea for anything but the IPL to adopt.

Yes having less revenue for TV and more games rained off is a great idea.

 

[Gob]

Hey 07 was fun

 

[Raghav]

My WC's in the order of worst to best
2011
2007
2015
1999
2003
1996

 

[hazsa19]

I had my reservations on the format, and obviously the rain and length of the tournament are big drawbacks, but I’m loving the almost daily big matchups.

The other drawback is the lack of knockout matches. It wouldn’t take much imagination to create s few more and also make the round robin a little more interesting. I think in the rugby league super league 1 plays 2, winner progresses to final. 6 plays 3, 4 plays 5, winners play eachother, winner of that plays 2 for the last spot in the final. A variation of that would create more knock out matches and put more on the last couple of round robin matches.

 

[Burgey]

I must say I’ve enjoyed it, but then again my side hasn’t had a wash out against a rubbish side rob it of points yet, so I can get why people are pissed. India-NZ washout was a ****ing travesty. Had game of the tourney written all over it.

 

[Dan]

I like the (admittedly theoretical, because England) idea of everyone having to play everyone in a short space of time. It works both in terms of seeing matches that don't happen often (e.g. Australia vs Afghanistan), and has the point of different to the spam JAMODIS (Australia vs India etc.) because both teams are actually picking something resembling their strongest XIs.

If there were some stakes all the way down the table (so that the game between 8th and 9th in the last round matters), I think this would be a really good format.

But I don't know if those positives outweigh the really small number of teams. I'm still missing the Associates - I don't want to see Australia vs Canada often, but once every four years works for me.

 

[Victor Ian]

Super sixes, with some matches played in areas some countries will want to forfeit due to politics/safety is where it is at. 2003 was a great world cup with England and New Zealand having to endure righteous indignation.

 

[Victor Ian]

I don't get the comments about tournaments being too long. If it weren't an Ashes year, I'd be despondent having to wait until November for more cricket.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah it’s difficult to have a trade off between seeing associates, which is a **** load of fun, and having a much higher % of competitive matches. I dunno where the optimal balance lies tbh, it’s a personal preference thing.

 

[Bahnz]

I had my reservations on the format, and obviously the rain and length of the tournament are big drawbacks, but I’m loving the almost daily big matchups.

The other drawback is the lack of knockout matches. It wouldn’t take much imagination to create s few more and also make the round robin a little more interesting. I think in the rugby league super league 1 plays 2, winner progresses to final. 6 plays 3, 4 plays 5, winners play eachother, winner of that plays 2 for the last spot in the final. A variation of that would create more knock out matches and put more on the last couple of round robin matches.

I feel the almost exact opposite about this, for me a huge number of games feel inconsequential, because you know that Sri Lanka and Afghanistan (and probably Bangladesh too) are going to be nowhere near the race for the semi's at the backend. Partly that's a consequence of the awful decline in the quality of Sri Lanka over the past couple years which isn't something the tournament organisers could've predicted, but still it leaves you in a place where narly half of the group games feel like killing time.

 

[Bahnz]

Only in theory though. If the top 4 separate themselves from the others early on, this format could feel dreadfully overlong and pointless.

Yeah, this was 2007's problem. You knew that the semi-finalists would be AUS, SRL, NZL and SAF more or less for certain after a couple rounds of matches. Unfortunately things are heading that way again this time. Apart from Pakistan's win over England, the mid-tier sides haven't really shaken things up too much. SAF have been terrible, WI and Pakistan have had their chances but bottled it more often than not, and NZ haven't even really started their campaign-proper due to their schedule and the rain.

 

[vcs]

Last week has been largely terrible.

Overall, I haven't enjoyed it nearly as much as the gut-wrenching highs and lows of our tour to England last year. It was amazing to follow even though Moeen broke our hearts in the end.

Different formats though I guess, so can't really compare.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I have thoroughly enjoyed this week. Some very engrossing games. Eng SL probably the game of the tournament so far.

 

[Daemon]

Bloody hell yesterday and SL v England were amazing. 3 brilliant matches and the underdogs exceeded expectations in all of them, even if not all crossed the line.

 

[OverratedSanity]

SA NZ was great too. Bit of a shame there are going to be some inconsequential games now, but these last few days have been awesome.

 

[Victor Ian]

I'm seeing all games of consequence now. Those out of the hunt will throw all caution to the wind to upset those above them. All danger games now.

 

[hazsa19]

Could be some awesome matches this week. Weather will be warm, some risk of storms, but would be surprised if there were any washouts. Good to see Lords and Edgbaston are in use now too.

 

[OverratedSanity]

In theory, I think this new format can make for compelling viewing where each point earned genuinely contributes to your progression to the sf, unlike previous tournaments where a lot of the time the good teams would sleepwalk through the group stage unless they were shocked by a minnow (which weren't particularly frequent).

Only in theory though. If the top 4 separate themselves from the others early on, this format could feel dreadfully overlong and pointless.

I'm so glad I was wrong.