Print

[brokenbat]

Can't wait for Ind vs Pak - the EPIC battle for second-last place

[ProCricketer1982]

Watching the highlights.. My god WI are poor. They should be embarrassed to call themselves professional players Wight hat showing. England weren't exactly awesome..

[brokenbat]

Watching the highlights.. My god WI are poor. They should be embarrassed to call themselves professional players Wight hat showing. England weren't exactly awesome..

They should just have a tri-series (Aus, SA, NZ) to decide the world champions

[InternalTraining]

Then associates would be left out and cricket, internationally, would be reduced to just 8-10 countries.

Let there be an upset...AFG? IRL? ZIM?

[Gerry SA]

2019 ICC World Cup will only feature 10 teams. So no more assosciates

[InternalTraining]

Really, wow! Will there be a qualifying round to give associates an opportunity to play in the World Cup? I think it is not a very good thing to do if you want to grow the size of the cricketing world.

[InternalTraining]

Dhawan bowled - India 7-1. Afg team off a good start.

[cleanbowled]

Really, wow! Will there be a qualifying round to give associates an opportunity to play in the World Cup? I think it is not a very good thing to do if you want to grow the size of the cricketing world.

I think its a bit of a catch 22. The current world cup I think is 44 days which in itself is much longer than the football (or soccer depending on where you live) world cup at 32 days, and that is a truly global game with 32 teams playing (and more than a 100 others wishing they were a part of it). In cricket it is essentially always been 8 for a long time, and in general most likely those 8 will go through to the quarters (WI might be an exception this time on form).

I think I read it somewhere that they could have had 4 groups of 4 (ie add 2 more teams) and still had a shorter world cup if structured correctly (the 2007 one was longer at 49 days). One of the reasons it has been structured as 2 x 7 is to avoid the 2007 situation (which was 4 groups) where India and Pakistan failed to make it past the group stages. In the next cup presumably that will mean 2 pools x 5 nations each - almost kinda beats the point. Might as well start off with quarters and the top 8 and be done with it 

From the point of growing the game I think the 16 teams and the 4 x 4 format was a good idea. The problem is probably something like 80 per cent (likely more) of the viewing audience and the revenue comes from the subcontinent (majority from India), so they are kind of forced to ensure those nations get through to the elimination stages at least.

[InternalTraining]

Kohli gone, India 16-2. Good bowling by Afg bowlers. Associate team is doing well so far, gents.

[InternalTraining]

I think its a bit of a catch 22. The current world cup I think is 44 days which in itself is much longer than the football (or soccer depending on where you live) world cup at 32 days, and that is a truly global game with 32 teams playing (and more than a 100 others wishing they were a part of it). In cricket it is essentially always been 8 for a long time, and in general most likely those 8 will go through to the quarters (WI might be an exception this time on form).

I think I read it somewhere that they could have had 4 groups of 4 (ie add 2 more teams) and still had a shorter world cup if structured correctly (the 2007 one was longer at 49 days). One of the reasons it has been structured as 2 x 7 is to avoid the 2007 situation (which was 4 groups) where India and Pakistan failed to make it past the group stages. In the next cup presumably that will mean 2 pools x 5 nations each - almost kinda beats the point. Might as well start off with quarters and the top 8 and be done with it 

From the point of growing the game I think the 16 teams and the 4 x 4 format was a good idea. The problem is probably something like 80 per cent (likely more) of the viewing audience and the revenue comes from the subcontinent (majority from India), so they are kind of forced to ensure those nations get through to the elimination stages at least.

Well, revenue and catering to subcontinental teams will open another can of worms. Sports has to grow, regardless,  which means encouraged participation of "enthusiastic" Afghans, Irish et-al. If an associate knocks out a full-member, more power to the associate and more work for the full-member. We should give cricket audiences some credit for maturity - I am sure they will thoroughly appreciate an upset and leave a loud message ("get your effing act togther") to their players via stones, rocks, and other assorted tools for expressing displeasure.

[cleanbowled]

Well, revenue and catering to subcontinental teams will open another can of worms. Sports has to grow, regardless,  which means encouraged participation of "enthusiastic" Afghans, Irish et-al. If an associate knocks out a full-member, more power to the associate and more work for the full-member. We should give cricket audiences some credit for maturity - I am sure they will thoroughly appreciate an upset and leave a loud message ("get your effing act togther") to their players via stones, rocks, and other assorted tools for expressing displeasure.

Agree entirely with what you have said in principle. If the associates have beaten them fair and square, that is in fact a great result for cricket as a whole. Unfortunately  the focus will be on the immediate loss of revenue (for both the ICC and the BCCI) if say India in particular were to go out (as in 2007) in the group stages and hence that is something they would look to prevent as much as possible (as they are have done here).

[i12breakfree]

Kohli gone, India 16-2. Good bowling by Afg bowlers. Associate team is doing well so far, gents.

India
94/2 17 overs
Some recovery from India

[cleanbowled]

Back to the cricket now - what's up with Kohli, another failure. Out for just 5. His one day form so far has been the exact opposite of what he did in the tests.

[InternalTraining]

Agree entirely with what you have said in principle. If the associates have beaten them fair and square, that is in fact a great result for cricket as a whole. Unfortunately  the focus will be on the immediate loss of revenue (for both the ICC and the BCCI) if say India in particular were to go out (as in 2007) in the group stages and hence that is something they would look to prevent as much as possible (as they are have done here).

That's short term thinking; reality is Indian market is not going anywhere. There are other markets with big financial benefits like North America where US and CAN teams could generate buzz for the sport in the World Cup venue. Soccer (football) in the US is a great example which has come a long way in last 15-20 years. I am sure FIFA is not complaining either. ICC's idea of commercial attraction is shorter boundaries, two new balls, and field restrictions. That is just idiotic.

[csnew]

Dhoni looks woefully out of form. Surprised rohit batted so long and didn't retire after passing a 100 to give someone else a go like maxwell did last game.

Can't see any of the minnows beating the big teams this World Cup. Just see records being smashed and a chance of a few 200s being scored

Much rather prefer the top 8 teams playing each other once, with the best 4 going through to the semi's