Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: The Twenty20 world cup should be 16 teams, 4 groups of 4. Then quarters, semis etc

  1. #1
    State Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    979

    The Twenty20 world cup should be 16 teams, 4 groups of 4. Then quarters, semis etc

    The current system is convoluted and weird. It doesn't feel like a World cup by having a qualifying stage mid cup and **** and then the Super 10 and stuff.


    This format would be too short for a 50 over world cup but suits the short form fine. Every team gets at least 3 games, it's even and fair.

    2 top 8 teams spread into each group.

    Zim, Bang, Ireland and Afghanistan in each group

    Netherlands, Scotland/UAE/Kenya/PNG/Nepal/Hong Kong to make up the numbers.

    Gives the minnows a slim chance of qualifying to the final 8, but no matter how you structure one of these it'l always be hard(and rightly so) for them to make the final 8


    Seems like the perfect format to try a 16 team tournament since they're keen of cutting the 50 over variant to 10 teams or whatever

  2. #2
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Windsor, UK
    Posts
    11
    Good idea but giving that we saw how India insisted on playing 9 games in 2019 they (or any of the other big nations) would never vote in through. That format would work perfectly in the Olympics and if the Icc does apply for Olympic status and do the T20 World Cup in its current format two years before and after that would work as well.

  3. #3
    International Coach G.I.Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    11,860
    Quote Originally Posted by CzechMikey View Post
    Good idea but giving that we saw how India insisted on playing 9 games in 2019 they (or any of the other big nations) would never vote in through. That format would work perfectly in the Olympics and if the Icc does apply for Olympic status and do the T20 World Cup in its current format two years before and after that would work as well.
    wot?
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    If GI 'Best Poster On The Forum' Joe says it then it must be true.
    Athlai doesn't lie. And he doesn't do sarcasm either, so you know it's true!

  4. #4
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Windsor, UK
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by G.I.Joe View Post
    wot?
    I thought that was one of the main reasons for the format change. Somebody told me that was the reason, however no matter how true that is (it's also much easier for any of the big teams to get larger TV revenues for the new format) there is still no way that format would be voted through as less games for England, Australia and India means less money for the ICC.


  5. #5
    International Coach G.I.Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    11,860
    Quote Originally Posted by CzechMikey View Post
    I thought that was one of the main reasons for the format change. Somebody told me that was the reason, however no matter how true that is (it's also much easier for any of the big teams to get larger TV revenues for the new format) there is still no way that format would be voted through as less games for England, Australia and India means less money for the ICC.
    As far as we know currently, it's Giles Clarke pushing for the format.

  6. #6
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cribbertopia
    Posts
    47,006
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_mister View Post
    The current system is convoluted and weird. It doesn't feel like a World cup by having a qualifying stage mid cup and **** and then the Super 10 and stuff.
    I thought this before the last tournament, but I actually think it worked surprisingly well. I still wouldn't mind the swap to what you're saying, but as long as they don't move the qualifying tournament to a different part of the calender or a different country, or worse still decide not to bother televising it, then I'm pretty cool with it staying as it is.
    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
    Rejecting 'selection deontology' since Mar '15
    Moeen is a perfectly fine bowler FFS


  7. #7
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    6,496
    They want as many as possible of the major nations playing each. 4 groups then straight knockout ensures exactly the opposite.

  8. #8
    State Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    979
    Eh it works for the soccer world cup so it can work for the cricket one

  9. #9
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    6,496
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_mister View Post
    Eh it works for the soccer world cup so it can work for the cricket one
    The last time the soccer World Cup used this format was 1970.

  10. #10
    State Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    979
    Um wot. Obviously I know the difference between 32 & 16. Try and think about what I meant

  11. #11
    State Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    private.
    Posts
    1,134
    No issue with the above idea, 4 groups, 4 teams would be fine as well.

    Ten team world cup is bollocks and not a world cup whatsoever.

  12. #12
    State Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    private.
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by G.I.Joe View Post
    As far as we know currently, it's Giles Clarke pushing for the format.
    Its the BCCI as well as Clarke. Clarke and Srini are vile, and deserve to be criticised non stop over it, but sadly not many other nations are really opposing the move.

  13. #13
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    6,496
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_mister View Post
    Obviously I know the difference between 32 & 16.
    Yeah right.

  14. #14
    International Coach G.I.Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    11,860
    Quote Originally Posted by Niall View Post
    Its the BCCI as well as Clarke. Clarke and Srini are vile, and deserve to be criticised non stop over it, but sadly not many other nations are really opposing the move.
    I dunno. The BCCI has always been madly in love with knockouts. Hence the ICC knockout trophy in '98 and the quarterfinals format in WC '96 and '11.

  15. #15
    State Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    979
    Quote Originally Posted by Lillian Thomson View Post
    Yeah right.

    such scathing wit



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. *Official* Quarters/Semis/Final General Discussion
    By James in forum World Cup 2011
    Replies: 279
    Last Post: 29-03-2011, 11:39 AM
  2. World Twenty20 Groups set for England 2009
    By cricman in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 01-11-2007, 04:30 PM
  3. CA Cup Semis (Teams)
    By Paid The Umpire in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-08-2002, 11:20 PM
  4. Friendlies teams - During CA Cup Semis
    By Paid The Umpire in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 01-08-2002, 05:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •