Is the Champions Trophy just a waste of time this year? - Page 2

Mister Wright · 28-04-2006, 09:37 PM

The players and teams probably think it is a waste of time. However for the development of cricket it isn't a waste of time considering most of the money goes to developing cricket nations.

howardj · 28-04-2006, 11:36 PM

I guess it's not the best time to have it, being so close to WC2007. However, the fact remains, it's still the only event (outside of the World Cup) where all the major nations face off against each other; at the same time; in the same conditions; in the most popular (spectator-wise) form of the game. That alone gives the event meaning. If one was to argue it's meaningless, then what does that make all the other ODI tournaments outside of the World Cup?

honestbharani · 29-04-2006, 12:37 AM

Conceptually, the CT is an awesome idea. But for it to attain the status everyone wants it to, I think it should be held every 4 years, just like the WC. And every second year, we would either have the CT or the WC to look forward to. That would make way more sense, IMHO. As far as this year's CT is concerned, I think it is going to be interesting because it will be a great preparation for the WC, as even the tracks in the Windies seem to be getting slower, just like the subcontinent.

aussie · 30-04-2006, 06:27 PM

as HB just said the idea of the tournament is very good, but should be helod every 4 years just like the WC. Every 2 years really doesn't make too much sense.

adharcric · 30-04-2006, 07:02 PM

agreed

thedarkmullet · 30-04-2006, 09:34 PM

Whoops clicked wrong one, I dont care.

Swervy · 01-05-2006, 03:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by honestbharani

Conceptually, the CT is an awesome idea. But for it to attain the status everyone wants it to, I think it should be held every 4 years, just like the WC. And every second year, we would either have the CT or the WC to look forward to. That would make way more sense, IMHO. As far as this year's CT is concerned, I think it is going to be interesting because it will be a great preparation for the WC, as even the tracks in the Windies seem to be getting slower, just like the subcontinent.

what is the status that everyone wants it to attain though???
We already have a world cup.....if you want the CT to be every 4 yaers and the WC to be every 4 years, why not just have a WC every two years?
IMO have CT every two years by all means, but have a simple 2 group first round and the winners of the two group contest the final. Every team would play at least 3 games, and no more than 4, and it could be over and done with within a couple of weeks. We dont need another month long tournament which,lets face it, is miles behind in prestige to the world cup

Jono · 01-05-2006, 09:18 AM

They should have just kept it knock out like it used to be.

Craig · 01-05-2006, 08:01 PM

I'll watch and will probably will care.

Smudge · 07-05-2006, 08:16 PM

I definitely care about the Champions Trophy.

The fact that this is the only majorish trophy that New Zealand has won has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with it....

Honest.

age_master · 09-05-2006, 05:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jono

The hosts didn't want it, teams don't want to play, everything points to yes it being a waste of time.

I'll still watch though, but why so close to the WC? Stupid.

yeah i dont see why teams aren't taking it more seriously, perfect oportunity to fine tune your WC squad.

honestbharani · 12-05-2006, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swervy

what is the status that everyone wants it to attain though???
We already have a world cup.....if you want the CT to be every 4 yaers and the WC to be every 4 years, why not just have a WC every two years?
IMO have CT every two years by all means, but have a simple 2 group first round and the winners of the two group contest the final. Every team would play at least 3 games, and no more than 4, and it could be over and done with within a couple of weeks. We dont need another month long tournament which,lets face it, is miles behind in prestige to the world cup

The Champions Trophy will have only 8 teams, the top 6 and two qualifiers from the next 4. Hence, it is the CHAMPIONS TROPHY. The World Cup will have a lot more teams, as any World Cup should (football is the exception, obviously).

Samuel_Vimes · 16-05-2006, 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by honestbharani

The Champions Trophy will have only 8 teams, the top 6 and two qualifiers from the next 4. Hence, it is the CHAMPIONS TROPHY. The World Cup will have a lot more teams, as any World Cup should (football is the exception, obviously).

But in that case, it's more like the Confederations Cup in football (which also has 8 teams) - and which nobody cares about.

honestbharani · 16-05-2006, 01:50 AM

but the 8 are the best teams in the world... Shorter format and duration and lesser chances of comeback. It doesn't seem such a bad idea to me.

LongK · 20-05-2006, 12:37 AM

Total waste of time. Its only there for the money. Equivelent(sp) to the commonwealth games.

View Poll Results: Champs Trophy: Do you care?
Yes	38	40.86%
No	55	59.14%
Voters: 93. You may not vote on this poll

07-05-2006, 08:16 PM	#25 (permalink)
Smudge Hall of Fame Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Wellywood Posts: 16,551	I definitely care about the Champions Trophy. The fact that this is the only majorish trophy that New Zealand has won has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with it.... Honest. __________________ What do you mean?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Cricket Web Fantasy Cricket - ICC Champions Trophy 2004	James	Fantasy Cricket	9	27-09-2004 05:23 AM
ICC Champions Trophy 2004: Match Reports	Andre	ICC Champions Trophy 2004	13	27-09-2004 12:45 AM
ICC Champions Trophy 2004	James	Cricket Chat	5	30-05-2004 06:43 AM
ICC Champions Trophy 2004	GermanShepherd	Cricket Chat	70	11-05-2004 11:00 AM
South Australian Crickets Don Bradman Medal Night	Blewy	World Club Cricket	2	14-10-2003 05:07 AM

28-04-2006, 11:36 PM	#17 (permalink)
howardj International Coach Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: brisbane Posts: 12,103	I guess it's not the best time to have it, being so close to WC2007. However, the fact remains, it's still the only event (outside of the World Cup) where all the major nations face off against each other; at the same time; in the same conditions; in the most popular (spectator-wise) form of the game. That alone gives the event meaning. If one was to argue it's meaningless, then what does that make all the other ODI tournaments outside of the World Cup?

30-04-2006, 06:27 PM	#19 (permalink)
aussie Hall of Fame Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Cricket Posts: 16,845	as HB just said the idea of the tournament is very good, but should be helod every 4 years just like the WC. Every 2 years really doesn't make too much sense.

30-04-2006, 07:02 PM	#20 (permalink)
adharcric International Coach Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: San Francisco, California Posts: 10,898	agreed

30-04-2006, 09:34 PM	#21 (permalink)
thedarkmullet School Boy/Girl Captain Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Wellington, NZ Posts: 177	Whoops clicked wrong one, I dont care.

01-05-2006, 09:18 AM	#23 (permalink)
Jono Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Virat Kohli Posts: 47,477	They should have just kept it knock out like it used to be.

16-05-2006, 01:50 AM	#29 (permalink)
honestbharani Hall of Fame Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Columbus, IN Posts: 15,208	but the 8 are the best teams in the world... Shorter format and duration and lesser chances of comeback. It doesn't seem such a bad idea to me.

20-05-2006, 12:37 AM	#30 (permalink)
LongK Cricket Spectator Join Date: May 2006 Location: Brisbane Posts: 7	Total waste of time. Its only there for the money. Equivelent(sp) to the commonwealth games.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)