Quote:
Originally Posted by BoyBrumby
IIRC the 1996 WC was criticised for basically giving a bye to the quarter finals for the big 8, thus rendering the group matches largely irrelevant. We (England) qualified by beating the might of the Netherlands (no offence meant) & the UAE. It was because of this that the "Super" stage was introduced in subsequent tournaments to give the group stage more meaning.
In my mind there's no doubt that the Super 8 was too long & I personally have never liked the idea of carrying results from earlier rounds forward. I'd just propose two groups of 4 teams in the second round instead with the top two teams progressing to the semis.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel_Vimes
But the Champions Trophy already patented that format. 
(the easy solution: Get rid of the Champions Trophy and replace it with a Twenty20 WC. Everybody wins. Except those who like the middle overs, poor sods.) |
you read my mind! but then you know there's the people who wants a tournament for the elite teams alone and then those would try to make the wc a elite team tournament. right now when they complain we can simply say go watch the CT for that but still i'm not a fan of the CT.