Page 1 of 4
World cup down to 10 teams
Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2011 9:57 pm
by mdm
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/cont ... l#comments
With the world cup cut down to 10 teams this means associates dont have as much exposure to the bigger teams even though its probably once in 4 years. However I dont know if this is good for cricket or its just maximising profits thing by the ICC but i think it just limits cricket to some extent. Another question being raised by some people is that Ireland are better than Zimbabwe (basing from the ICC ODI rankings) and that they should qualify ahead of ZIM. What does everyone think. Is cutting down to 10 good and does Zimbabwe deserve to be part of the 2015 world cup ahead of the other associates even though we aren't an associate?
Re: World cup down to 10 teams
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 4:47 am
by Trevor
Well, its quite a shame that. I was kind of hoping that the World Cup format would remain the same and that the ICC would keep the ICC championshipn to the 8 teams etc..it is a world cup after all..
That being said the Irish are making a lot of noise as to why Zim has to play instead of them seeing as they are currently ranked above us. I guess this is good pressure in a way, we need to improve our performances..hopefully with more International exposure over the next few years we will start to see some results. I put down a lot of our timid performances due to lack of exposure. You could see that whenever our batsmen faced genuine pace they struggled. They would not have faced that against Bangladesh, Ireland, Kenya and even domestically. If i remember correctly, Zim's archiles heel used to be facing spin bowling. I beleive they have somewhat adressed that but regressed in facing pace bowling.
I believe that the current set up is conducive to great results and I dont think there is need to bring the likes of Brian Lara etc to the coaching set up. Grant and Heath should be enough for us. However we may need a Team Psycologist to work on our mentality. We need to build up our self belief again.
By the way, if the SA team are the Proteas, and the NZ team are the black caps....what is the Zim team called?
Re: World cup down to 10 teams
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:52 am
by brmtaylor.com admin
Trevor wrote:By the way, if the SA team are the Proteas, and the NZ team are the black caps....what is the Zim team called?
That was one of the very first discussions we had on the forum:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=44
The ideas were: "Flames", "Zimbos", "Zimmers", "Zimboks", "Crimson Avengers" (guess who came up with that!). If you want to be controversial, "The MDC Connection" also made the list
Re: World cup down to 10 teams
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:27 am
by Dr_Situ(ZimFanatic)
The 10 team format is good. It's burrowed from 9 team round-robin clash of my favourite 1992 world cup. It will be a tough and fair competition as every team will play against each other and a true world cup in strict sense. Ireland are making noises because they play good cricket in world cup. They were better than Bangladesh to be honest but they have to first beat Zimbabwe in a series to press their claims. With test cricket soon to be resume we will only improve.
Re: World cup down to 10 teams
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 12:27 pm
by eugene
I have no problem with a 10 team World Cup. I do think there should have been some element of qualification to at least give the associates some hope of qualifying. Still, four years is a long time - perhaps the ICC will alter their decision if the outcry is large enough.
Re: World cup down to 10 teams
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 1:37 pm
by Boundary
This story was mentioned on a Guardian blog and the comments there are, understandably, furious towards the ICC on behalf of Ireland but also unfairly lumping this issue as Ireland v Zimbabwe and we know whose side most Britons will take. Zim cricket imploded a few years ago, took time out and is now rebuilding. The best thing is for ZC to say nothing, to not allow this to be an Ireland v Zim slanging match and to let our cricket do the talking. I say over the next 4 years we should play lots of one day cricket against Ireland and hopefully render this argument moot. At the moment Ireland are better than us but not by much. Over the long term we can sustain our cricket, so we should believe in ourselves more. This argument cannot be won anywhere else but the cricket field.
Re: World cup down to 10 teams
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:57 pm
by maehara
Quick copy'n'paste of what I wrote over on ZCN earlier today:
Allow me to put my fan hat on for a moment, and throw impartiality out the window for a moment. I should also point out here that, while I'm first and foremost a Zimbabwe fan, I'm also an Ireland supporter. With that said...
Here are the problems with this:
- you cannot call a tournament a "World Cup" if participation is restricted to 10 defined nations. That's the Champions Trophy remit, not the World Cup's. To be truly a "World Cup", every cricket-playing nation should have a chance, however unlikely, of qualifying - for the past two World Cups the World Cricket League has provided that, it no longer does.
- it's a travesty that, in a 10-nation world cup, the 11th-ranked nation (Zimbabwe) is given a free pass into the competition at the expense of the 10th-ranked (Ireland). And believe me, the other nations in the World Cup will not let us forget this, especially if we were to perform in the next World Cup the way we did in the one just ended.
- fine, the path for Associates is reopened from 2019 - but that's 8 years away, and without the promise of the World Cup, maintaining interest and participation in the sport of cricket will not be easy. Rising participation in Ireland has been on the back of the side's World Cup upsets in 2011 and 2007, they'll be out of the limelight now for 8 years. The publicity gained from World Cup participation is irreplaceable.
- the sop offered to Associates by way of compensation is increased representation at the World Twenty20. Playing T20 will not help these sides develop.
The key issue here is the perception of fairness. The ICCs decision unfairly excludes the Associates, particularly Ireland based on their current world ranking. A qualifying tournament including, say, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh plus the top 4 Associates would remove that perception (and I have enough confidence in Zimbabwe's playing standards to be confident that we would qualify from such a tournament), leaving the fate of Associate representation at the World Cup in the hands of the Associates - if they play to the required standard, they'll be rewarded with a place. But to simply slam the door in the faces of those countries - who the ICC are supposed to be supporting the development of and especially when they were involved in many of the most exciting games of the last tournament, seems short-sighted at best.
The ICC spends most of their news release singing the praises of the 2009 World Cup, and the huge success it has been, before cutting off one of the reasons for that success. I hope the ICC will reconsider.
Re: World cup down to 10 teams
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 9:06 pm
by Maweni
Ireland better than Zim?! What rubbish! They're only ranked above us because we've played more test playing nations! They can't even beat us in series and half of their team is made up of mercenaries from test playing nations who couldn't get into their home teams. In 4 years most of those mercenaries will have retired(Botha, Johnston etc) and they'll find it difficult to field a team of Irishmen because they have very little cricket infrastructure and the few good players they get are stolen by the English. Instead of moaning at the ICC they should improve their infrastructure. I even think it would be a shame to see a team from a country where the majority of the population calls cricket "gay" amongst other unimaginative and offensive names included amongst the elite nations(I know this because I've lived and played cricket in Ireland). Quite frankly I think its disgraceful that they should get the same number of points for beating an associate that we get for beating a test nation. The ranking system is inherently flawed and the ICC could not use it for qualification.
Re: World cup down to 10 teams
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:07 pm
by maehara
As I've said: I don't doubt we would confirm our place if a qualifying tournament were to be held. But I want Zimbabwe to be in the next World Cup because we've proven ourselves worthy of being there, not because of some elitist bull**** carve-up that denies the opportunity to anyone else.
And please don't try to tell me that Zimbabwe performed better than Ireland in this past World Cup. We were bloody abysmal against any team ranked higher than us, with the possible exception of Australia.
Re: World cup down to 10 teams
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:25 pm
by Maweni
maehara wrote:And please don't try to tell me that Zimbabwe performed better than Ireland in this past World Cup. We were bloody abysmal against any team ranked higher than us, with the possible exception of Australia.
Had we been in that group we would have qualified! What did Ireland do? Beat a tired and below par England side? Who also lost to Bangladesh. And they beat the Netherlands, big wow! Our group was much stronger theirs which in fact contained the sides ranked 10, 9 & 8 so it was bound to be more competitive whereas the lowest ranked team we had in to compete with was 7th. This whole thing with Ireland and the Irish claiming to be better Zim has become quite tedious.