What's new

How the 1996 World Cup came to the sub-continent

Abdullah719

T20I Captain
Joined
Apr 16, 2013
Runs
44,825
Nearing 88, Neil Perera seeks his warmth in nostalgia.

The former Sri Lanka Cricket Board secretary has witnessed history in the making, be it the sub-continent co-hosting the 1996 World Cup or Sri Lanka’s eventual triumph in that premier event.

Residing in a Colombo suburb rich in tropical foliage and dotted with old-world bungalows, Perera mined his memories. Not many know that Perera played a crucial hand in India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka jointly hosting the 1996 World Cup.

Here is his back-story: “Nelson Mandela had been released from the jail and he rang up president Ranasinghe Premadasa and wanted our support for South Africa in their bid to host the World Cup. At the meeting, England too put its bid forward. South Africa and England got four votes each, while Pakistan voted for itself.

“The meeting was temporarily adjourned and I approached the Pakistan Cricket Board president General Khan and told him that since Pakistan didn’t have much of a hope, he should bid with us and India. He agreed and when the members voted again, South Africa pulled out.

“Our bid got five votes and England managed four but we needed two-third majority. A compromise was made with England opting to back out on the condition that it should get the World Cup in 1999. Similarly, South Africa demanded hosting rights for the 2003 World Cup and the matter was resolved.”

Perera’s effort drew praise from the then BCCI secretary Jagmohan Dalmiya, whose letter the former has preserved. “Without your crucial role at the ICC meeting in London on February 2, 1993, the ‘cake’ perhaps would not have come to this sub-continent,” Dalmiya wrote.

The India-connect that Perera has, had its roots in the 1975 tour. “My first stint as a team manager was the 1975 tour of India. Players like Anura Tennekoon (captain), Roy Dias and Duleep Mendis were part of that team. I was paid 3000 Sri Lankan rupees for that tour. My friend Ghulam Ahmed was the BCCI secretary and after two weeks I ran short of my money. I asked Ghulam to lend me Rs. 2000. He gave me three to four thousand but never took it back.

Sri Lanka was very strict with foreign exchange then and we could each carry only 3 pounds and 10 shillings. At that time, our cloves were liked by the Indians and each one of us took two kgs of cloves to sell. English bats were also difficult to get in India and each of us took two bats and sold one. That’s how we survived,” Perera said about a tour in which he had a run-in with Bishan Singh Bedi, over an alleged pitch-issue at Kolkata’s Eden Gardens.

Cut to the present, Perera is happy that cricket has gained financial muscle in Sri Lanka but is worried that the system isn’t robust. He also feels slighted.

“People who run the game have forgotten me. I have been in the (SLC) committee for 20 years, six years as secretary, one year as vice-president and six times as Sri Lanka’s team-manager. But I don’t even get to sit in the president’s box during matches,” Perera said wistfully.

http://www.thehindu.com/sport/crick...came-to-the-sub-continent/article19466641.ece
 
1987 WC was also hosted in Asia so not sure what the hoopla is regarding the 1996 WC.
 
1987 WC was also hosted in Asia so not sure what the hoopla is regarding the 1996 WC.

Exactly my thoughts

Also never understood why Pakistan and India and later Bangladesh had to hold the tournament together considering their populations
 
It's the world cup Pakistan should've won. I know people think we were some elite team in the 1999 edition, and while we were still good then, these were halwa home conditions and the Anwar-Amir opening combo was going great. No Wajahutllah Wasti to weaken the line up like he did in the 1999 edition.

However we had the 3rd most shadiest captain in the history of the game so as you can imagine, that may or may not have played a part.

But this was the 2nd world cup in home conditions that we blew. 1987 was also winnable.

Goes to show the brutal nature of these tournaments. They are a bit of a lottery, doesn't matter how good a team has been historically, what the conditions are, whether the drinks break will have coke or pepsi. Whichever team is better on the day wins.

Case in point, champions trophy 2017.
 
It's the world cup Pakistan should've won. I know people think we were some elite team in the 1999 edition, and while we were still good then, these were halwa home conditions and the Anwar-Amir opening combo was going great. No Wajahutllah Wasti to weaken the line up like he did in the 1999 edition.

However we had the 3rd most shadiest captain in the history of the game so as you can imagine, that may or may not have played a part.

But this was the 2nd world cup in home conditions that we blew. 1987 was also winnable.

Goes to show the brutal nature of these tournaments. They are a bit of a lottery, doesn't matter how good a team has been historically, what the conditions are, whether the drinks break will have coke or pepsi. Whichever team is better on the day wins.

Case in point, champions trophy 2017.

Wasti was okayish during the 1999 WC - I remember he scored 84 or something like that in the SF against NZ.

Our biggest weakest link were oldies like Salim Malik and Ijaz Ahmed. Also Inzy and MoYo did squat the whole tournament. Our batting was literally Saeed Anwar or bust lol. Same goes for 96 although Aamer Sohail was a good opener too.
 
Exactly my thoughts

Also never understood why Pakistan and India and later Bangladesh had to hold the tournament together considering their populations

Co hosting WC's is probably better for tourism and the fan experience along with cost sharing although on the flip side revenues get shared as well.

1996 WC probably gets more historical significance since a minnow had won a WC I guess.

However in the 87 WC - Pakistan or India should have gone all the way in home conditions. Australia winning it was an upset back in the time.
 
Wasti was okayish during the 1999 WC - I remember he scored 84 or something like that in the SF against NZ.

Our biggest weakest link were oldies like Salim Malik and Ijaz Ahmed. Also Inzy and MoYo did squat the whole tournament. Our batting was literally Saeed Anwar or bust lol. Same goes for 96 although Aamer Sohail was a good opener too.

1996 Miandad was a deadweight and was stretching out his career like Younis in the 2015 world cup. But Younis had to beg for it.

Ijaz was a beast in Asia though, and just the conditions in general should've made it easier for our team, but we failed to capitalize.
 
1996 Miandad was a deadweight and was stretching out his career like Younis in the 2015 world cup. But Younis had to beg for it.

Ijaz was a beast in Asia though, and just the conditions in general should've made it easier for our team, but we failed to capitalize.

Yeah you are right - Ijaz and Salim were both good in Asia. Ramiz Raja was not bad either.
 
India are going to host the 2023 world cup alone.

and thats how it should be

if anything different parts of india should hold world cups on their own

atleast WT20s. like one edition just south india region and the other north and northeast incl. kolkata, ranchi

its ridiculous. we have 9-10 top flight nations and 3-4 subcontinental hold it in one go boasting a total pop of atleast 1.5bn
 
Last edited:
and thats how it should be

if anything different parts of india should hold world cups on their own

atleast WT20s. like one edition just south india region and the other north and northeast incl. kolkata, ranchi

its ridiculous. we have 9-10 top flight nations and 3-4 subcontinental hold it in one go boasting a total pop of atleast 1.5bn

India and Pakistan jointly hosting 87 world cup made sense, since it was the first time world cup was being held outside England and the whole world was skeptical about our ability to hold such a tournament.

However in 96 and 2011, it was just politics to keep the Asian bloc united in ICC which led to SL and Bang being co hosts. And you are right, 4 countries out of 10 co hosting a world cup is just preposterous.
 
It's the world cup Pakistan should've won. I know people think we were some elite team in the 1999 edition, and while we were still good then, these were halwa home conditions and the Anwar-Amir opening combo was going great. No Wajahutllah Wasti to weaken the line up like he did in the 1999 edition.

However we had the 3rd most shadiest captain in the history of the game so as you can imagine, that may or may not have played a part.

But this was the 2nd world cup in home conditions that we blew. 1987 was also winnable.

Goes to show the brutal nature of these tournaments. They are a bit of a lottery, doesn't matter how good a team has been historically, what the conditions are, whether the drinks break will have coke or pepsi. Whichever team is better on the day wins.

Case in point, champions trophy 2017.

Definitely agree.

Had Pak beaten India, they would have won the 1996 WC. That Pak team was seriously good.

The likes of Anwar, Akram, Saqlain, Waqar, Inzamam were all in their prime.
 
Pak team from 1994-2000 was seriously good. Its amazing how much they underachieved.
 
Back
Top