The 16 Team format is perfect as long as the best sides go through to the super 8’s but I like the 14 Team format best as it gives me a chance to watch Zimbabwe play 6 games minimum.
The ICC jumped the gun too early IMO getting rid of the 14 Team format because the associates are stronger than ever and we now have 12 full members
Discussion
ICC CWC Qualifiers announced
Discussion
ZCF OriginalZCF Hall of Famer
jaybro wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2018 11:44 pm
The 16 Team format is perfect as long as the best sides go through to the super 8’s but I like the 14 Team format best as it gives me a chance to watch Zimbabwe play 6 games minimum.
The ICC jumped the gun too early IMO getting rid of the 14 Team format because the associates are stronger than ever and we now have 12 full members
ICC doesnt care how strong the Associates are. This was a purely financial move and as often is the case financial means elitist as well.
You have to remember this plan is not new. It dates back to the 2006 Champions Trophy and was implemented for ODIs in 2011 when the powers that be just wanted the 8 established sides only. In order to give a theoretical shot for Japan or Germany to qualify they were forced to create a system where BD and ZIM would almost certainly take the last 2 spots.
This plan is not as bad now, because 3 teams who miss out on the WC get included in the ODI league which is even more important in the grand scheme of things. 24 ODIs spread out over 3 years vs 6 ODIs every 4 years is a no brainer.
Correction: 36 ODIs in 3 years!
Bangladesh cricket fanatic, observer of all others.
Member actions
Share
Kriterion_BD wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2018 12:00 am
jaybro wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2018 11:44 pm
The 16 Team format is perfect as long as the best sides go through to the super 8’s but I like the 14 Team format best as it gives me a chance to watch Zimbabwe play 6 games minimum.
The ICC jumped the gun too early IMO getting rid of the 14 Team format because the associates are stronger than ever and we now have 12 full members
ICC doesnt care how strong the Associates are. This was a purely financial move and as often is the case financial means elitist as well.
You have to remember this plan is not new. It dates back to the 2006 Champions Trophy and was implemented for ODIs in 2011 when the powers that be just wanted the 8 established sides only. In order to give a theoretical shot for Japan or Germany to qualify they were forced to create a system where BD and ZIM would almost certainly take the last 2 spots.
This plan is not as bad now, because 3 teams who miss out on the WC get included in the ODI league which is even more important in the grand scheme of things. 24 ODIs spread out over 3 years vs 6 ODIs every 4 years is a no brainer.
Correction: 36 ODIs in 3 years!
They only get 24 ODIs in 3 years.India play more matches against SL in a year than this
Member actions
ShareZCF OriginalZCF Hall of Famer
firebreaker wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:37 am
They only get 24 ODIs in 3 years.India play more matches against SL in a year than this
They get 12 series of 3 games each against all the other League teams. Thats 36 games in 3 years.
Its better than just 6 games in 4 years and then nothing until the next WC which is what happened to Ireland, Scotland, and others in 2011-2015.
And once the League starts even India will only be playing that many games. Any extra games they play will be scheduled against the lesser sides, because they will keep their clashes against Australia and SA for the primetime league fixtures to maximize interest, demand, and hence revenue.
Bangladesh cricket fanatic, observer of all others.
Member actions
ShareLOL they can play only 8 teams of their choice during the cycle including Ireland and Afghanistan which they used to play even before so I don't know how is it better than having 16 teams in a WC.
Member actions
Share