Chastened by yet another bloated World Cup full of mismatches, the International Cricket Council announced on Monday that the 2015 tournament will only include the 10 Test-playing nations.
The decision came after the past two editions were criticised as too long and containing too many emerging nations.
Next time around, India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, New Zealand, South Africa, Australia, England, the West Indies, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe will do battle in a round robin, with the four best teams to advance to the semi-finals.
That was the format the last time the 50-over showpiece was co-hosted by Australia and New Zealand and it was a good one.
However, barring associate nations from taking part – there will be NO qualification process for 2015 – can only be detrimental to the game’s global growth.
The ICC’s olive branch is to expand the biannual Twenty20 World Cup to 16 teams – the 10 Test Nations, plus six associate nations. However, many emerging nations believe this is not enough to sustain cricket within their borders for eight years.
Yes, three of the associate nations at the recently completed World Cup – Kenya, Canada and the Netherlands – performed terribly. But one – Ireland – beat England and certainly didn’t disgrace themselves against the likes of South Africa and India. And, they are actually above Zimbabwe on the ICC’s own ODI rankings.
Now, they will have to wait until at least the 2019 World Cup – to be hosted by England – before they can perform on the 50-over game’s biggest stage again.
Look at the rugby union and football World Cups – the union tournament is ever-expanding, while the 2018 and 2022 football showpieces will be hosted by nations that have never had it before. Both sports are taking their game to new frontiers.
Cricket should be doing the same.
Rather than CONTRACTING its biggest tournament, cricket should be EXPANDING.
If I was running the show, the World Cup would be contested by 16 teams – the 10 established nations plus six qualifiers.
Instead of the seven-team groups we just saw on the subcontinent, I’d have four four-team pools.
Following FIFA’s lead, the top eight-ranked Test nations would be put into one ‘pot’ for the draw. The two lowest-rankest Test nations would join the six associate nations – who would qualify via an associates’ tournament two years earlier – in ‘pot’ two.
Pot one would be drawn first – the first and fifth teams to come out of the hat would be in Pool A, the second and sixth in Pool B, the third and seventh in Pool C and fourth and eighth in Pool D.
Hypothetically, we could see this:
Pool A Pool B Pool C Pool D
India Sri Lanka Pakistan South Africa
West Indies Australia New Zealand England
The process would be repeated for pot two, leading to something like this:
Pool A Pool B Pool C Pool D
India Sri Lanka Pakistan South Africa
West Indies Australia New Zealand England
Zimbabwe Bangladesh Ireland The Netherlands
Canada Kenya Scotland Afghanistan
Now, here’s the kicker – there would only be three pool games for each team, ensuring EVERY game matters, something that has been lacking from the past two World Cups. The top two from each pool would qualify for the quarter-finals A1 v B2, A2 v B1, C1 v D2, C2 v D1.
The tournament would be over quickly, ensure every game matters and help grow the game by giving MORE nations a chance to test themselves against established powers. People might gripe if their team is drawn in a pool with two other Test nations, but ‘groups of death’ have been a fact of life and a talking point in football for years.
