So you really think India have strong enough political power to override an International tournament including 90% of the other nations? For example, they could argue against the World Cup if a few of their main players were injured, and win? If that is the case then India have too much power. I knew they wouldn't like international series over the IPL, but they would never have the power to cancel them. I believe the ICC still run cricket, despite the BCCI being very very close behind and everyone else being very far behind them.
Yes, I rather suspect that they do have that level of pull when it comes to any new innovation, as opposed to existing competitions (though even there the BCCI have a certain amount of previous, such as over the biennial structure of the T20 World Cup and the format of the 50 over version. You see, the politics of the ICC is such that they can get their own way very easily - it is long established that the four Asian boards will always vote en bloc behind one another, whilst New Zealand and the West Indies rely too heavily on the television revenue that comes from series with India for their financial well being toeffectively oppose them. So that leaves Australia and South Africa, who have one set of interests, and England who have a subtly different set, swinging in the wind on any key vote.
In terms of criticism, I like to know what you did/didn't like, what could be done better and how to improve.
Fair enough, you've asked the question.
I'll start with something I actually liked - your post on James Kirtley. It was a bit too long and the writing bears many of the flaws that I shall go on to mention later, but at least you were writing something that was unique to your blog. You could have improved that piece by going further down that personal line, cutting out a lot of the extraneous career-bio from the middle and maybe reflecting on why it is that so many youngsters have "odd" favourite players (mine, for the record, was Ashley Metcalfe, who I doubt many will even have heard of).
The problem is, the other posts you've made have not had the same individuality; they have, for the most part, appeared bland rehashes of arguments or issues that anyone likely to read them will find covered far, far better on a dozen mainstream websites; they have not hinted at the bredth of subject knowledge required for a project such as this and, allied to the sheer number of the things, have come across rather like the kind of forum blitz that sponsors such as MSR and Hammer did before getting the message that quality is better than quantity. There are loads of potential topics within the sport that do not get covered at all regularly, if indeed they ever are, so why do we need another dozen pieces on the ICC rankings?
In addition, I suspect that you have yet to grasp the art of critically rereading your own work before you make it public, as there are any number of glitches that you ought to have picked up and corrected yourself before publication contained therein. It is a time consuming process, but a little thought to the clarity of your grammar and the structure of your arguments (which are not necessarily wrong in and of themselves), as well as to the overall word count, would improve your work considerably.
Really sorry if you think any of this harsh.
Author
Topic: World Test Championship (Read 24279 times)