CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
Yes, I will rank this WC one of the best already. The format has played its part in it. I like this format for WC.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Rank the World Cups from best to worst
- Thread starter Bahnz
- Start date
Howe_zat
Audio File
What bugs me about the format is how little the matches matter individually. They only matter in volume.
When England lost to Pakistan it should have made it hard for them to make the next stage, as it is it hardly budged their odds at all. And at the end of India v Australia the commentators were trying to find reasons why we should care.
When England lost to Pakistan it should have made it hard for them to make the next stage, as it is it hardly budged their odds at all. And at the end of India v Australia the commentators were trying to find reasons why we should care.
vcs
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Maybe they'll start to matter less towards the end if the top 4 get locked in pretty quickly. As of now, they feel pretty meaningful to me.
CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
That is the beauty of this format, isn't it? While the England team is clearly the better team than Pakistan, one win in the WC by Pak over Eng shouldn't disqualify the better team. Best 4 teams in the world should go to the semis and best team should win the world cup.
Howe_zat
Audio File
*shrug*
If that's the ideal may as well do a 5-match bilateral series instead of a final. Or not have a world cup and award it to the top ranked side.
ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
I thought in previous 2 world cups league games were more immaterial. Top 4 teams from each group that had exactly 4 "strong' teams and 2-3 "minnows" would qualify. So you could lose all games to "strong" teams and win only against "minnows" and still qualify. This format certainly challenges top teams more to get to next round although they are allowed a few fails.
_Ed_
Request Your Custom Title Now!
There were quite a few good ones in 2015 too, tbf:
Ireland (307-6) beat WI (304-7) by 4 wickets
NZ (146-7) beat Scotland (142) by 3 wickets
Zimbabwe (286-6) beat UAE (285-7) by 4 wickets
SL (236-6) beat Afghanistan (232) by 4 wickets
Ireland (279-8) beat UAE (278-9) by 2 wickets
Afghanistan (211-9) beat Scotland (210) by 1 wicket
NZ (152-9) beat Australia (151) by 1 wicket
Pakistan (235-7) beat Zimbabwe (215) by 20 runs
India (185-6) beat WI (182) by 4 wickets
Pakistan (222) beat SA (202) by 20 runs
Ireland (331-8) beat Zimbabwe (326) by 5 runs
Bangladesh (275-7) beat England (260) by 15 runs
NZ (290-7) beat Bangladesh (288-7) by 3 wickets
NZ (299-6 - D/L) beat SA (281-5) by 4 wickets
Athlai
Not Terrible
NZ vs Australia was an epic game
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
The associates gave us some of the best games of that world cup early on. Afg vs Scotland was fantastic.
CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
This terrible rain starting to lower the ranking of this WC.
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
A lot of those games were of fairly limited meaning between minor/minnow participants though, so it was hard to get too worked up about them (e.g. Zim v UAE, Scotland v Ireland and Ireland v UAE etc). For me, the only really thrilling games were NZ v Aus, Pakistan v SAF, Bangladesh v England and the Eden Park Semi-Final. Funnily enough they were all games involving modest-midsized totals (even if it was rain-enforced in the case of NZ v SAF).
cnerd123
likes this
Get 32 teams
Run four stand alone qualifying tournaments. Market and sell each of them. 8 teams, round robin, top 2 proceed to WC.
Then you have a main 8 team WC tournament. Round robin, then IPL style qualifier - top team goes straight to final, 2nd plays 3rd for second spot.
All 5 main regions get to host (England, Australia/NZ, Carribbean, India/SL/BD, Africas), and the 32 teams can be distributed into 4 groups based on ODI rankings.
Run four stand alone qualifying tournaments. Market and sell each of them. 8 teams, round robin, top 2 proceed to WC.
Then you have a main 8 team WC tournament. Round robin, then IPL style qualifier - top team goes straight to final, 2nd plays 3rd for second spot.
All 5 main regions get to host (England, Australia/NZ, Carribbean, India/SL/BD, Africas), and the 32 teams can be distributed into 4 groups based on ODI rankings.
mr_mister
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I reckon a 12 or 14 team cup with the top 3 advancing from round robin groups of 6 or 7 could work fine.
But instead of super 6s, just have the two top ranked teams automatically proceed to the SFs while the 2nd and 3rd teams from each group play each other for the other 2 spots
But instead of super 6s, just have the two top ranked teams automatically proceed to the SFs while the 2nd and 3rd teams from each group play each other for the other 2 spots
shifty_eyes
U19 12th Man
Of all the WCs I have seen, from best to worst
2015
2011
2019 (so far, due to rains)
2015
2011
2019 (so far, due to rains)
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
This is definitely the most irritating world cup I've seen.
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
This will go down as the worst I reckon. This rain has messed it up totally. Least it looks brighter next week.
