Time for an admission. As much as I have been rooting for the ODI game and the 2011 world cup, it has failed to address the same problems every world cup has had since 1996. I do enjoy watching minnow teams take on the best, but unfortunately the proportion of one-sided games is far too high. Unlike most pundits and journalists though, I wont simply put the boot into the game, I am going to offer a solution.
The Current Format
Two pools of seven, therefore a total of 21 games per pool, and a total of 42 pool matches.
I prefer this format to the super sixes/eights format which added a lot of bloat to the tournament. The point of the super format was to eliminate the minnows politely and focus on the big teams for a longer part of the tournament. Of course this backfired when Kenya and Zimbabwe (2003), and Ireland and Bangladesh (2007) advanced unexpectedly. Not their fault at all.
The problem now is that out of the pools of seven, lets say four are 'top level' teams. They will play 6 games among each other in a pool, and 12 in total. Out of 42 games, having only 12 'big team' games is ridiculous. Having one game a day also means that the tournament runs for nearly a month and a half.
The ICC took action and has reduced the number of teams for the 2015 edition. A typically blunt and poorly thought out answer, treating the symptom but ignoring the cause. Canadian captain Ashish Bagai rightfully pointed out that the associate teams need the world cup event as an aspiration.
My Proposed Format
Too many teams the problem? I disagree, in fact I think there should be more teams. Consider the format I would like to see:
The Current Format
Two pools of seven, therefore a total of 21 games per pool, and a total of 42 pool matches.
I prefer this format to the super sixes/eights format which added a lot of bloat to the tournament. The point of the super format was to eliminate the minnows politely and focus on the big teams for a longer part of the tournament. Of course this backfired when Kenya and Zimbabwe (2003), and Ireland and Bangladesh (2007) advanced unexpectedly. Not their fault at all.
The problem now is that out of the pools of seven, lets say four are 'top level' teams. They will play 6 games among each other in a pool, and 12 in total. Out of 42 games, having only 12 'big team' games is ridiculous. Having one game a day also means that the tournament runs for nearly a month and a half.
The ICC took action and has reduced the number of teams for the 2015 edition. A typically blunt and poorly thought out answer, treating the symptom but ignoring the cause. Canadian captain Ashish Bagai rightfully pointed out that the associate teams need the world cup event as an aspiration.
 |
| Damned if they do. Damned if they don't. © Reuters |
My Proposed Format
Too many teams the problem? I disagree, in fact I think there should be more teams. Consider the format I would like to see:
- Two pools of eight teams
- Pool A contains the eight highest ranked teams
- Pool B contains the next eight (the minnows)
- The result is 28 games per pool, and 56 in total
- Every day there is one match from pool B and one from pool A, pool play will end in approx. 30 days
- The top 6 teams of pool A qualify for the playoffs, along with the top 2 teams from pool B
- They will participate in a standard quarter finals format which runs for approx 8 days
This format works for me on many levels. It shortens the length of the world cup, greatly increases the number of competitive matches, and also increases exposure to the smaller cricketing nations. There is incentive for every team to play hard as teams will be eliminated from each pool.
Lets Try It
I am going to play god for a moment. Say that the West Indies and New Zealand play poor cricket and don't make the top six cut, while in pool B Bangladesh and Ireland have strong showings and come out on top. The final pool standings looks something like this:
Pool A
- Australia
- India
- South Africa
- Pakistan
- Sri Lanka
- England
- West Indies
- New Zealand
Pool B
- Bangladesh
- Ireland
- Zimbabwe
- Netherlands
- Kenya
- Canada
- Afghanistan
- Scotland
Like most playoff formats, the top team (Australia-A1) will play the bottom team (Ireland-B2), A2 will play B1, and so on. I'd then split them up in such a way the top two teams (Australia A1 and India A2) are on either side of the playoffs draw, and converge to the final. The quarter finals will then become:
- Australia vs Ireland (A1 vs B2)
- Pakistan vs Sri Lanka (A4 vs A5)
- South Africa vs England (A3 vs A6)
- India vs Bangladesh (A2 vs B1)
You would then (probably) get semi-finals looking like:
- Australia vs Pakistan
- India vs South Africa
Alternatively you could have an elimination round where the two bottom placed pool A sides (West Indies, New Zealand) face the pool B winners (Bangladesh, Ireland) to decide the remaining two quarter final spots.
Your thoughts? Do leave comments.
