2023 ODI World Cup Discussion

[Pat_Bee]

If everyone is in the tournament it does cheapen it tho. I think 14 is probably the ideal number at this point. If you took the top 14 teams, Nepal and Namibia would miss out and ideally that’s what you want. You want a marquee event where some decent sides miss out. It puts that value on the World Cup. Especially since the T20 WC has 20 teams now and is more frequently played.

You need a few whipping boys otherwise Zimdesh will fill that role

[Kriterion_BD]

If everyone is in the tournament it does cheapen it tho. I think 14 is probably the ideal number at this point. If you took the top 14 teams, Nepal and Namibia would miss out and ideally that’s what you want. You want a marquee event where some decent sides miss out. It puts that value on the World Cup. Especially since the T20 WC has 20 teams now and is more frequently played.

You need a few whipping boys otherwise Zimdesh will fill that role

We already have Afghanistan and Sri Lanka for that role

2019 we had West Indies and South Africa too!

[Kriterion_BD]

Except that a couple of good lesser sides will miss out the much needed pay day that essentially keeps them alive.
As usual I don't agree with you.

Those sides should train harder.

Look, Bangladesh and Afghanistan are classic examples of poor brown countries who through hard work and determination, climbed the ladder of success to the highest level. And this is only possible in the great sport of cricket. You wouldn’t be able to do that in FIFA or rugby. And that’s what makes the ICC the greatest governing body in sports history…the ability to go from Division 5 in 2008 to Test status in 2017 as Afghanistan have done or from barely scrapping by Fiji in 1979 to beating Pakistan at the 1999 World Cup as Bangladesh did. But it can’t happen with handouts and entitlements…only perseverance, determination, and training hard.

[secretzimbo]

Wow the above post is full of so many inaccuracies it is breathtaking. Both about football, rugby, and certainly cricket.

In fact there is so much wrong with it I don’t know where to begin

[Googly]

They has got more issues than Dylan Mulvaney

[Kriterion_BD]

Wow the above post is full of so many inaccuracies it is breathtaking. Both about football, rugby, and certainly cricket.

In fact there is so much wrong with it I don’t know where to begin

It was a parody post. I wanted it to sound like Tim Scott or Vivek (rhymes with cake) Ramaswamy.

I’ve been in favor of a 12-14 team World Cupfor the past few years as I think that’s the best balance of expanding without just letting any team into the Cup. I don’t think anyone here thinks that expansion to the point of just letting Bermuda or Italy or Malaysia (who almost beat Bangladesh in the Asian Games T20 couple days ago, btw) walk into a World Cup is a good idea.

Opportunity and level playing fields (ie equal opportunity to succeed ) is what is most important and the ICC has done a pretty good job there. Afghanistan could not have developed as quickly as they did without the World Cricket League. Nepal and USA have made strides with League 2. The Super League was a good idea, but impractical given the constraints of T20 leagues and India-PAK beef.

At the time of the 10 WC decision circa 2015, the idea was keep the top 8 + Bangladesh and Zimbabwe as the likely qualifiers who would be there to just make up the numbers really. Ireland and Afghanistan were the next best sides and in 2015 the ICC felt whichever 2 made it out of BD/ZIM/AFG/IRE would be enough dilution of quality.

12 teams in the WC would be better for quality control…14 would be ideal for inclusivity.

[Googly]

Your humour is so shit you have to give us a heads up when you're having an attempt.
Perhaps 3 of these to let all know that we must strap a back brace on for the ensuing hilarity.

[Googly]

And you're having a dip at Republicans of colour when your democrats are leading your country down the toilet and the rest of us potentially to a nuclear winter. We'll be fine here, it's quite hot, a 30 degree drop will be most welcome.

[secretzimbo]

I’ve been in favor of a 12-14 team World Cupfor the past few years as I think that’s the best balance of expanding without just letting any team into the Cup. I don’t think anyone here thinks that expansion to the point of just letting Bermuda or Italy or Malaysia (who almost beat Bangladesh in the Asian Games T20 couple days ago, btw) walk into a World Cup is a good idea.

Well they shouldn't 'walk' in - that's why we have qualification series. Btw, the top 8 DO just 'walk in' and that is totally unfair. Every team should have to qualify including full members. Even if it is just a formality. They should still have to qualify.

I think 16 is reaosnable for the WC and 20 for the T20WC.

Opportunity and level playing fields (ie equal opportunity to succeed ) is what is most important and the ICC has done a pretty good job there. Afghanistan could not have developed as quickly as they did without the World Cricket League. Nepal and USA have made strides with League 2. The Super League was a good idea, but impractical given the constraints of T20 leagues and India-PAK beef.

Is this humour again? The ICC have done an absolutely terrible job of it. There is no level playing field whatsoever - even amongst the full members let alone associate members. There's also no opportunity. Afghanistan's development was a different era. Presently and going forward the future is especially bleak for the associates unfortunately.

The Netherlands just had the Super League, guaranteed fixtures. They didn't win many/any but were surprisingly competitive in quite a lot of matches. Then they went and beat two full members to WC qualification.
.....But the next four years look bleak as they've effectively been 'relegated' due to the scrapping of the super league. Back to playing a series against the associates every six months if they are lucky. No full member will touch them with a barge pole now. How is that opportunity or development or level playing fields?
Netherlands meet effectively all of the full membership criteria and are arguably a better side than ireland and yet get less than 5% of the ICC budget that Ireland do. Far far far less than Zim do and they aren't that far behind us on the pitch. This doesn't happen to this extent in any other major sport. International football is the best example. Rugby has been very inclusive and lots of the tier 2 nations are developing.

The ICC (read: BCCI) actively wants a closed shop. It demonstrably regrets giving FM status to Ireland and Afghanistan and I don't think we'll ever see a 13th Test playing nation in my lifetime.


None of this really matters anyway as the end game for these Indian druids running the game is to do away with international cricket entirely beyond the Big 3 and eventually build a year-round integrated franchise circuit centred on the IPL and IPL-owned teams elsewhere with 12-month contracted players to ownership groups. Maybe a small-circle T20WC will survive in the long-term.
But ultimately international cricket will be a thing of the past in most of our lifetimes. Probably in the next 1-2 decades.

Cricket is the worst administered major sport in the world without doubt. At every single level. Nobody gives a damn about inclusion or growth.

[Pat_Bee]

Jos moaning about the outfield few broncos, some charas and playing a game in the Himalayas is the stuff dreams are made of hey. Too coddled these modern players. Why’s Stokes even there? He’ll have one good innings when he’s back from his injury and they’ll flop somewhere down the line. Plenty of overrated players in that side; Mo is solid though in a Naqvi kind of way. Would be the first name on my team sheet every game.