Cricket: A sport that takes one step forward and four steps back

[Executioner]

My late father used to always tell me that cricket is a game that will never be played around the world.

My stubborn self would never agree with him. To me cricket had its own beauty. And soon enough a lot of countries will take up the sport for the love it.

I have seen some progress. Some new teams coming in like Ireland and Afghanistan. There are these programmes on Star which tells about people taking up the sports in indigenous parts of the world. I saw cricket world cup go suddenly become a 16 team event and a T20 WC was also introduced where associates could participate.

But in a couple of days, a rat race will begin. Only two of the following teams will be able to qualify:

Netherlands
West Indies
Afghanistan
Zimbabwe
Scotland
Nepal
Ireland

Now there are some exciting players in all these teams and shockingly only two of these teams will make it to the real world cup. Winner takes all.

So you are trying to tell me, a cricket world cup will be held in a year where I might not be able to see Brendan Taylor, RTD, Myburg, Samuels, Gayle, Holder, Kesrick, Masakadza, Sikandar Raza, Obrian brothers, Coetzer, Cross.

The name of the tournament to be played is Cricket World Cup. Where is the world if you have only 10 nations playing for it? The true purpose of a world cup is not to just see who wins the cup, its also about the little incidents in the tournament itself. A world cup is a platform for showing the world that there are other good players too!

Oh and WT20? Its a 16 team tournament but in reality, its exactly like the CWCQ where only 2 teams can join the top 8.

The question is, how longer can the game be sustained when no new cricket nations consolidate and teams playing each other over and over again. Also, its sad to see players of associate nations having to do part time job.

My dad was right, cricket would never a global sport. We see one step forward, and 4 steps back.

 

[hafeezrocks]

Sorry Bro, I often saw you referring to your father in the past. Didnt know he is no more.

You are correct, let's hope new teams are added in the future T20 tournaments, that's our only hope. 50 Overs Cricket may not see new teams emerging in the future at all.

 

[BlackShadow]

Most newer Cricket nations have been a failed experiment. If greater number of teams means more one sided floggings (which it does currently), then I don't want it.

 

[j_kazmi]

It’s all about profit maximisation now. The ICC doesn’t seem to care about developing the game anymore.

The main reason the World Cup and the wt20 have fewer teams now is because they want the bigger teams to play each other more which will bring in more money.

Why else is every team going to play 9 matches in the group stage of the World Cup next year. 9 matches is a ridiculous amount of matches to play in the first stage of the World Cup in any sport. 80% matches in the World Cup are gonna be dead rubbers.

 

[Brodipet_baadshah]

Just bcoz of few odd exciting players cant allow substandard teams to take part in world event else it will end up like the yawn fest we had in 2015...
Any idea whether these World Cup qualifiers are being telecasted or not? If yes...ppl can njoy the quality of these exciting players instead of diluting the actual tournament

 

[RickyG]

There's not enough quality for cricket to be competitive with a 16 team world cup. The other problem is that countries like Netherlands, Ireland, Zimbabwe, Scotland and Nepal bring in virtually zero revenue for the ICC. You can't fault the ICC for not trying because they have tried to make cricket a more global sport.

International cricket, in any case, is no longer as popular as it once was. League cricket (T20) is the new phenomenon and is the only way to sell the sport to non-conventional followers of the game.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

50 over WC should be played by 14 teams.

20 over WC should be played by 18 teams.Without the qualifier rubbish.

 

[leatherface58]

Cricket is the only game whose governing body and fans want less teams to play. You cannot win by playing in 10 teams and call yourself World champions.

 

[Bilal7]

Cricket is not a global sport, definitely not the test and ODI versions of it. However, there is nothing wrong with that, not every sport can be as simple to pick up as soccer.

The 2011 WC had a bunch of minnows participating but people did not like that either because the majority of games were very one-sided. I'm okay with having Afghanistan and the West Indies/Zimbabwe join the others in the World Cup. None of the other teams are any good these days.

 

[rhony]

So many deserving European countries find themselves out of the soccer world cup to accommodate inferior countries in other continents. Atleast cricket is not going that way and is choosing only the best of the world to compete.
There is a qualifying tournament and if someone is good enough to compete against the elite teams, they will succeed in that tournament.
AT the end of the day, the tournament is for the spectators. I dont care for too many one sided games.

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

I may be wrong but didn't the group of South africa and India was really interesting with every weak team punching above the weight in wc 2015

 

[indipper]

Cricket was always a cheap knockoff of baseball. Admins needed to work extra honestly for its expansion but they went with the money and made it exact copy of baseball instead of traditionally defensive game. Now its dying a slow death.

 

[DeadBall]

Cricket was always a cheap knockoff of baseball. Admins needed to work extra honestly for its expansion but they went with the money and made it exact copy of baseball instead of traditionally defensive game. Now its dying a slow death.

Cricket was being played before baseball was invented, which itself (many claim) was copied from the Romanian sport Oină.

 

[WengerOut]

The more duration a sport is , the more one sided the game between strong and weak team become. Football is only 90 minutes. Cricket is atleast 7 hours. So one sided whipping does not make great spectacle.

 

[reversehook]

For cricket to survive it needs a T20 league which is operated by the ICC in a style which any of the major leagues are run. The teams should not be international but rather city based from across the nations. Teams should be able to do proper drafts, trading, signings, etc etc... that is the only way the sport can go global. Put tons of money in it, fan following will be there when you have lineups with players from all over, not just one country heavy with 3-4 foreign.... Then the ICC can have the world cups on the side every 2 yr apart switching between 50 over or 20 over or just sticking with t20 every 4 yrs. Also, sadly but much needed tests will have to come to its demise (already over due).

That is the only way, other wise keep enjoying the bland-masala the way it is.

 

[indipper]

Cricket was being played before baseball was invented, which itself (many claim) was copied from the Romanian sport Oină.

Cricket was first recorded in 15th century, baseball was in 13th.

 

[Executioner]

Cricket is the only game whose governing body and fans want less teams to play. You cannot win by playing in 10 teams and call yourself World champions.

The worst part is fans too want lesser teams.

The thing is, let there be borefests if needed. But associate teams will atleast get an oppurtunity to showcase their talent. Imagine if Afghanistan didn't get to play 15 and 16 World cups, they would not have come this far.

Afghanistan have been able to add a different touch to cricket world. They are a rising team and their players like Rashid and Nabi play throughout the world.

Talking of borefests. Lets compare both CT and WC 2015 finals. One was a 150 run win and the other was a win with 15 overs to go or something.

 

[TNAmarkFromIndia]

I wonder if they can be aggressive about getting the level of associate teams up. Send the top U19/U21/U23 players of those countries to major cricket-playing nations to play at the club level. Simultaneously, send coaches to those countries to ensure they get better training at grassroots and domestic level. Also, ensure they get equal number of games at international U19 and 'A' level as some top teams. The more these cricketers play a higher level of cricket at a younger age, the more they'll improve.

 

[leatherface58]

The worst part is fans too want lesser teams.

The thing is, let there be borefests if needed. But associate teams will atleast get an oppurtunity to showcase their talent. Imagine if Afghanistan didn't get to play 15 and 16 World cups, they would not have come this far.

Afghanistan have been able to add a different touch to cricket world. They are a rising team and their players like Rashid and Nabi play throughout the world.

Talking of borefests. Lets compare both CT and WC 2015 finals. One was a 150 run win and the other was a win with 15 overs to go or something.

I don't get it. Why would you not want the sport to spread? Besides, if you think the minnow matches will not draw, look at the test series in UAE. There are more birds than spectators!

 

[Slog]

Beauty of cricket is that it is an exclusive sport played by limited number of teams

 

[Syed1]

Beauty of cricket is that it is an exclusive sport played by limited number of teams

That's not the beauty at all..... the reason why football is so loved that every nation has a certain character to their style of play and they bring a different flavour to the game. We see a glimpse of that in cricket as well. It would have been lovely to have some European or South American teams take up cricket, I'm sure they would bring something different to the table.

 

[TNAmarkFromIndia]

Forget Europe or South America, cricket could expand further in West/East Asia and further north of Africa as well. Cricket could try to target those countries which aren't exactly setting the world on fire in any sport. But it needs to start from the grassroots level and not just at the top. At they need government support. You could get schools involved and have them start cricket teams. That's where you introduce the sport to kids and their parents. Not everyone would make it into the football or volleyball team, so you could encourage them to take up cricket. You could also introduce the sport to underprivileged kids. If ICC are focused and aggressive, it could be done.

 

[Executioner]

That's not the beauty at all..... the reason why football is so loved that every nation has a certain character to their style of play and they bring a different flavour to the game. We see a glimpse of that in cricket as well. It would have been lovely to have some European or South American teams take up cricket, I'm sure they would bring something different to the table.

I usually don't agree with you but this time I do

The more teams the more beauty. How is it fun if the same teams play over and over again. That's where a lot of sports like rugby and football are doing well.

Imagine Afghanistan - they have a different style of play, they look different from your average subcontinental folks and they bring about a different attitude. Same goes to Ireland.

We have Nepal

Everyone brings in a different flavour. If you only have 8 dishes (pasta pizza burger...) For the rest of your life how would you feel? Don't you think maybe you could add something different.

 

[Executioner]

With Afghanistan likely to lose the match against Scotland their chances of qualifying now diminishes.

Don't you think that Afghanistan would have been a good team to include in a world cup? They can beat some lower tier sides on their day.

You gotta let these associate teams play in world cups. It helps them a lot. Do you really think it matters if there is 3-4 boring games in world cups?

 

[Itachi]

Cricket is not a global sport.

"world cup" is a reference with an context. It is stupidity of people who tries to equate it with requirements putting every nation should play.

No one wants weak associated teams in a world cup.

Not the administration.

Not the fans.

Not the broadcasters.

It has been tried and was a utter failure. That itself shows the feasibility of it.

World cup is definitely shouldn't be a testing platform to showcase associates.

 

[Executioner]

Cricket is not a global sport.

"world cup" is a reference with an context. It is stupidity of people who tries to equate it with requirements putting every nation should play.

No one wants weak associated teams in a world cup.

Not the administration.

Not the fans.

Not the broadcasters.

It has been tried and was a utter failure. That itself shows the feasibility of it.

World cup is definitely shouldn't be a testing platform to showcase associates.

Then how is it different from CT? 14 teams world cup can easily work.