Super 8 vs super 6 vs knockout QF vs Knockout in WC, which format best?

[Jumno]

We seen the super six in the 1999, 2003 WC.

We also seen a super 8 in the 2007 WC which was interesting a country played so many matches and anything could have happened.

Then 96, 11, 15 knockout QF.

Other world cup's top 2/4 SF's.

Should we have round robin like the 1992, 2019 or some teams then knockout stages qf, sf, final or even small group of teams like the 2007 and play a super 8?

The 2007 WC was interesting. It was almost do or die for most teams as they needed to win 2 out 3 in their group stages and win more than half of their games to reach the semi's. So it certainly adds to the excitement.

What are your thoughts?

 

[honestbharani]

I like the super 6 but they seem to have made up their minds that it has to be 10 teams and everyone plays everyone. Very fair format but very very unfair on the associates.

 

[mr_mister]

I think the Super 6 format was the most interesting

 

[TheJediBrah]

super 6 and semi finals. Feel like quarter finals is no good. Kind of makes the preliminary rounds pointless for everyone but the worst few teams if the top 8 make the finals regardless.

 

[mr_mister]

The 96 format was especially dumb

 

[morgieb]

The 07 format but with knockout QF's rather than the Super 8's, IMO.

 

[mr_mister]

No point of QFs when there are literally only 8 good teams in cricket

 

[TheJediBrah]

No point of QFs when there are literally only 8 good teams in cricket

Yes. If you're a major team then it makes the first 80% of the tournament irrelevant. You need to give every game as much meaning as possible.