"Format designed keeping top teams in mind" - Tournament Director

[turnstyle]

World Cup: World Cup format designed keeping top teams in mind - Ratnakar Shetty | Cricket News | ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 | ESPN Cricinfo

I understand the game needs to make money and all, but still..

Just wonder how the Indian/Pakistani fans feel? Do you think you'll still feel you've won it fair and square even though you've had a little nudge up over the rest. The fact that the other top 4 get a free pass to the quarters isn't lost on me either, but it does feel like this W.C is geared more towards revenue rather than the best team.

Sorry if it seems like a dig at the Sub-Continental teams.

 

[G.I.Joe]

I don't see how its a nudge up. There's 3 knockout games compared to 2 in the earlier editions. If anything, its made it tougher.

Wasn't the last WC format designed keeping revenue in mind?

 

[turnstyle]

I don't see how its a nudge up. There's 3 knockout games compared to 2 in the earlier editions. If anything, its made it tougher.

Wasn't the last WC format designed keeping revenue in mind?

It was. But i guess they didn't expect the bottom teams to do so well. I guess another point which grinds my gears and isn't mentioned is that Australia/New Zealand should've been hosting this version but were outvoted by the Sub-Continental/Zimbabwe coalition. Plus the fact that none of them have to play away from home in the knock-out matches. Even Australia had to play in NZ during the '92 World Cup.

 

[G.I.Joe]

It was. But i guess they didn't expect the bottom teams to do so well. I guess another point which grinds my gears and isn't mentioned is that Australia/New Zealand should've been hosting this version but were outvoted by the Sub-Continental/Zimbabwe coalition. Plus the fact that none of them have to play away from home in the knock-out matches. Even Australia had to play in NZ during the '92 World Cup.

How many knockout games would SA, the WI and England have had to play outside home in the World Cups they hosted?

Don't see why India/SL/Ban should lose that advantage just because they have to share a hosting opportunity. An alternative is each of the Asian nations hosting individual World Cups of their own.

 

[salman85]

World Cup: World Cup format designed keeping top teams in mind - Ratnakar Shetty | Cricket News | ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 | ESPN Cricinfo

I understand the game needs to make money and all, but still..

Just wonder how the Indian/Pakistani fans feel? Do you think you'll still feel you've won it fair and square even though you've had a little nudge up over the rest. The fact that the other top 4 get a free pass to the quarters isn't lost on me either, but it does feel like this W.C is geared more towards revenue rather than the best team.

Sorry if it seems like a dig at the Sub-Continental teams.

I've become tired of defending the current WC format tbh.Yes it is done to favor the bigger teams so the knockout stages maintain interest.People can go on and on about how the big teams are getting an easy passage into the next round,but if that didnt happen,viewership would come down drastically for the knockout stages.Crowds would become thinner,and the tournament would bomb like the 2007 edition.After the 2007 fiasco,it was only natural for the ICC to take a safer route,and this is it.Period.

I see nothing wrong with having the home team play all their group matches in their home country.And if Australia and Newzealand play their group matches in their respective countries for the 2015 WC,that would be completley Ok since they have all the right to have home advantage.This is a non-issue,and would never even come into consideration when a single country hosts a major tournamen

 

[vcs]

How is anyone getting a nudge over the rest? I thought everyone was supposed to start off with zero points..

 

[salman85]

How is anyone getting a nudge over the rest? I thought everyone was supposed to start off with zero points..

I guess because Pakistan/India were ousted early last time,and this time both teams are virtually guaranteed a place in the quarters.So are all other big teams,but somehow this world cup is giving out a very ICC-is-favoring-Subcontinent-Teams vibe to people

 

[vcs]

I guess because Pakistan/India were ousted early last time,and this time both teams are virtually guaranteed a place in the quarters.So are all other big teams,but somehow this world cup is giving out a very ICC-is-favoring-Subcontinent-Teams vibe to people

No one is virtually guaranteed anything.. they have to go out and win their games.

 

[salman85]

But the margin for error is much bigger this time compared to the last tournament.Which is why i used the word virtually

 

[marc71178]

I see nothing wrong with having the home team play all their group matches in their home country.

No, that bit is fair enough, it's the fixing of the knockout match venues AFTER finding out who is in them that's the big issue.

 

[slugger]

if you thought the top teams were getting an easier ride into the ko stage, thank your lucky stars your not a minow in 2015 they have not even been invited to that wc. an absolute disgrace.

 

[Ausage]

If an associate has a great game against someone like NZ or WI then they could sneak into the quarters. From there you're at the knockout stage, and only need to win one game to get to a semi final. I don't see how that is more difficult for a minnow than the long slog of a super 8s format.

If anything I think this format gives more opportunities to smaller teams.

 

[salman85]

No, that bit is fair enough, it's the fixing of the knockout match venues AFTER finding out who is in them that's the big issue.

What?

 

[Prince EWS]

World Cup: World Cup format designed keeping top teams in mind - Ratnakar Shetty | Cricket News | ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 | ESPN Cricinfo

I understand the game needs to make money and all, but still..

Just wonder how the Indian/Pakistani fans feel? Do you think you'll still feel you've won it fair and square even though you've had a little nudge up over the rest. The fact that the other top 4 get a free pass to the quarters isn't lost on me either, but it does feel like this W.C is geared more towards revenue rather than the best team.

Sorry if it seems like a dig at the Sub-Continental teams.

He said some stupid things in that interview, but really it favours no-one in particular. Everyone starts on 0; the best teams will make it through to the quarters. Obviously any decent system is going to favour the teams that perform well throughout the tournament; no-one is being given a leg up.

 

[marc71178]

What?

World Cup 2011: Hosts to play World Cup knockouts at home | Cricket News | ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 | ESPN Cricinfo

Farcical if you ask me.

 

[salman85]

World Cup 2011: Hosts to play World Cup knockouts at home | Cricket News | ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 | ESPN Cricinfo

Farcical if you ask me.

Every country has the right to home advantage,regardless of whether it's one country hosting the event or multiple countries.When one country hosts the event,it automatically gets home advantage in every game it plays.So why not apply the same thing to an event hosted by three countries?

I see nothing wrong with the whole thing.Every piece of criticsm seems to be an attempt to somehow degrade this WC.
.

 

[marc71178]

I've no problem with the home game in the groups, but it makes it a joke for the other teams - the grounds should've been set in stone so that all the teams know exactly where they go based on where they finish in the group - not having to wait to see who they get as to whether they have to go to one country or another.

 

[Blaze 18]

He said some stupid things in that interview, but really it favours no-one in particular. Everyone starts on 0; the best teams will make it through to the quarters. Obviously any decent system is going to favour the teams that perform well throughout the tournament; no-one is being given a leg up.

Every country has the right to home advantage,regardless of whether it's one country hosting the event or multiple countries.When one country hosts the event,it automatically gets home advantage in every game it plays.So why not apply the same thing to an event hosted by three countries?

I see nothing wrong with the whole thing.Every piece of criticsm seems to be an attempt to somehow degrade this WC.

Both these posts hit the nail right on the head.

 

[Somerset]

I've no problem with the home game in the groups, but it makes it a joke for the other teams - the grounds should've been set in stone so that all the teams know exactly where they go based on where they finish in the group - not having to wait to see who they get as to whether they have to go to one country or another.

I absolutely agree with your point - up until now I hadn't actually realised that the semi- and quarter-final venues hadn't been finalised; that seems to have been kept awefully quiet. In saying that, I can't help but wonder if the ICC's taken note of other big sporting events, like the 2007 Rugby World Cup, where France hosted the majority of the tournament but allowed for Wales to host a few matches - including a quarter final which France qualified for meaning the host nation couldn't watch their team play in their own country. For the record, IMO that was tough luck for France (despite them still winning, can't remember who they played though...) and the CWC should've adopted similar pre-determined scheduling.

 

[slugger]

I absolutely agree with your point - up until now I hadn't actually realised that the semi- and quarter-final venues hadn't been finalised; that seems to have been kept awefully quiet. In saying that, I can't help but wonder if the ICC's taken note of other big sporting events, like the 2007 Rugby World Cup, where France hosted the majority of the tournament but allowed for Wales to host a few matches - including a quarter final which France qualified for meaning the host nation couldn't watch their team play in their own country. For the record, IMO that was tough luck for France (despite them still winning, can't remember who they played though...) and the CWC should've adopted similar pre-determined scheduling.

i really cant remember what team france beat either.