Unpopular Cricket Opinions

Remove this Banner Ad

peternorth said:
Guys

can we just all agree that the cricket WC is the second biggest sporting event in the world after the FIFA world cup as we are posting on the cricket board?

Then we can move to the basketball board and proclaim that sport as the 2nd biggest.

Afterwards to the rugby board!

etc
Click to expand...
Olympics?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

t_94 said:
You're an AFL fan posing as someone who knows about cricket. Probably time to give it a rest and find something else to do. That face you put on the end of your comments adds nothing either.
Click to expand...

You are masquerading as an adult, when in reality you are a kid. What makes you the moral compass of the thread.

Champ, you dont even know anything about the AFL, let alone the cricket to be proffering an opinion.

All I said FFS is that the group stage of the WC is irrelevant which is an opinion held by many cricketing experts, because they are right.

Grow up.:rolleyes:
 
GROTTO said:
You are masquerading as an adult, when in reality you are a kid. What makes you the moral compass of the thread.

Champ, you dont even know anything about the AFL, let alone the cricket to be proffering an opinion.

All I said FFS is that the group stage of the WC is irrelevant which is an opinion held by many cricketing experts, because they are right.

Grow up.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Why does it have to be all about the the top 6 nations? In reality I'd say there's three teams with a real shot of winning this World Cup, that doesn't mean there won't be meaningful and enjoyable contests between teams that don't have a shot. Some of the best memories I have of World Cups are of associates knocking off full members against the odds. An 8, 10, or even 14 team 'World Cup' isn't really a global tournament but rather a glorified Champions Trophy.

The FIFA World Cup sets the global benchmark and they embrace weaker countries even though they know they won't win it. It's also a celebration of the sport not just about who ends up winning the final.
 
t_94 said:
Why does it have to be all about the the top 6 nations? In reality I'd say there's three teams with a real shot of winning this World Cup, that doesn't mean there won't be meaningful and enjoyable contests between teams that don't have a shot. Some of the best memories I have of World Cups are of associates knocking off full members against the odds. An 8, 10, or even 14 team 'World Cup' isn't really a global tournament but rather a glorified Champions Trophy.

The FIFA World Cup sets the global benchmark and they embrace weaker countries even though they know they won't win it. It's also a celebration of the sport not just about who ends up winning the final.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the mature response.:thumbsu:

The World Cup has yielded a types of massive upsets over the years and yes the minnows naturally figure heavily in that because of their low ranking. Yes there has been great games over the years that minnows have featured.

I have NOT said, I dont want minnows, but rather I would want the number included to be a lot less. I think the ICC has it right in that in the 2019 WC there will be just the 2. It makes the qualification for the 2 spots a lot more competitive and ensures the top 2 are the best and probably more likely to cause an upset than the lower ranked minnows.

For me, the WC is meant to showcase the best of the best to not only produce strong competitive games but it adds value to the tournament where every victory is earned. Teams like UAE cannot achieve that. Im sorry but they cant. Think about the team India, struggled for the past 2-3 months, they will sit in QT final and if they have a good day end up in a semi. Is that a fair system? They may only qualify because they beat so many low rated minnows. QT finals should be earnt with hard work and skill and not because you did well against bottom nations.

FIFA WC is a completely different beast to the Cricket WC. The Top 14 nations in the world are strong and competitive teams and will produce quality games. The same cannot be said about the lowly rated minnows. Yes they may win a few games and cause an upset but those upsets are likely to be caused by the Top 2 minnows, which I am fine and happy for them to participate.

Just food for thought, the FIFA WC for a long time did not have a team from Australasia. It cannot be called global when it didnt have a team represented by Australasia.

We have different opinions on this matter. I respect yours even though I totally disagree with it, along with the ICC as well.
 
GROTTO said:
Thank you for the mature response.:thumbsu:

The World Cup has yielded a types of massive upsets over the years and yes the minnows naturally figure heavily in that because of their low ranking. Yes there has been great games over the years that minnows have featured.

I have NOT said, I dont want minnows, but rather I would want the number included to be a lot less. I think the ICC has it right in that in the 2019 WC there will be just the 2. It makes the qualification for the 2 spots a lot more competitive and ensures the top 2 are the best and probably more likely to cause an upset than the lower ranked minnows.

For me, the WC is meant to showcase the best of the best to not only produce strong competitive games but it adds value to the tournament where every victory is earned. Teams like UAE cannot achieve that. Im sorry but they cant. Think about the team India, struggled for the past 2-3 months, they will sit in QT final and if they have a good day end up in a semi. Is that a fair system? They may only qualify because they beat so many low rated minnows. QT finals should be earnt with hard work and skill and not because you did well against bottom nations.

FIFA WC is a completely different beast to the Cricket WC. The Top 14 nations in the world are strong and competitive teams and will produce quality games. The same cannot be said about the lowly rated minnows. Yes they may win a few games and cause an upset but those upsets are likely to be caused by the Top 2 minnows, which I am fine and happy for them to participate.

Just food for thought, the FIFA WC for a long time did not have a team from Australasia. It cannot be called global when it didnt have a team represented by Australasia.

We have different opinions on this matter. I respect yours even though I totally disagree with it, along with the ICC as well.
Click to expand...

Fair play, good argument you put forward. My way of combating the fact that the associates by in large are not competitive and the fact it leads to a somewhat elongated tournament would be to have a 16 team tournament in groups of 4, with the top 2 from each group going through to the quarter finals. That way every game has meaning and if the associates are good enough, they will still be able to progress.

Will never happen though due to commercial reasons. I just think it's very poor for the Icc to say they are cutting down the number of teams for the next World Cup but keeping the elongated format to ensure a maximum number of games involving India.
 
t_94 said:
Fair play, good argument you put forward. My way of combating the fact that the associates by in large are not competitive and the fact it leads to a somewhat elongated tournament would be to have a 16 team tournament in groups of 4, with the top 2 from each group going through to the quarter finals. That way every game has meaning and if the associates are good enough, they will still be able to progress.

Will never happen though due to commercial reasons. I just think it's very poor for the Icc to say they are cutting down the number of teams for the next World Cup but keeping the elongated format to ensure a maximum number of games involving India.
Click to expand...

the only problem with a group of 4, a good team could be easily eliminated because of rain. Thats less of an issue with more games and a bigger group.

What I actually wanted was a round robin tournament, where you play every team twice and the minnows get a lot more exposure to all the teams in the WC. Also every game will be strongly attended and viewed and produce a better viewing spectacle. Also the minnows will play games against countries that they may have never played against as well.

With the round robin tournament, every match has importance as only the top 4 qualify for semi finals. To make it to a semi-final you have really earned and deserved the honour.

Whats your thoughts of a round robin tournament of the top 10 nations playing each other twice followed by SEMIs ???
 
GROTTO said:
the only problem with a group of 4, a good team could be easily eliminated because of rain. Thats less of an issue with more games and a bigger group.

What I actually wanted was a round robin tournament, where you play every team twice and the minnows get a lot more exposure to all the teams in the WC. Also every game will be strongly attended and viewed and produce a better viewing spectacle. Also the minnows will play games against countries that they may have never played against as well.

With the round robin tournament, every match has importance as only the top 4 qualify for semi finals. To make it to a semi-final you have really earned and deserved the honour.

Whats your thoughts of a round robin tournament of the top 10 nations playing each other twice followed by SEMIs ???
Click to expand...

Good point, I didn't factor in poor weather. I kinda get where you're coming from but for me that's too much repetition in a major tournament.
 
There is no other sport in the world that thinks that World Cup tournaments are only for the best of the best. Every single one has expanded consistently, and/or is going to in the near future. This is despite only a relatively small number of teams being a good chance of winning the tournament in those sports.
 
The Speaker said:
There is no other sport in the world that thinks that World Cup tournaments are only for the best of the best. Every single one has expanded consistently, and/or is going to in the near future. This is despite only a relatively small number of teams being a good chance of winning the tournament in those sports.
Click to expand...
True but when 8 teams are massively stronger than the next best having 8 go through to the next round is stupid, the issue with this WC is the format not the amount of smaller nations.
 
Kram81 said:
True but when 8 teams are massively stronger than the next best having 8 go through to the next round is stupid, the issue with this WC is the format not the amount of smaller nations.
Click to expand...

Yes, so why can't we have, say, four groups of five, and the top team in each groups goes through to the semis? Every match becomes vital.
 
t_94 said:
Fair play, good argument you put forward. My way of combating the fact that the associates by in large are not competitive and the fact it leads to a somewhat elongated tournament would be to have a 16 team tournament in groups of 4, with the top 2 from each group going through to the quarter finals. That way every game has meaning and if the associates are good enough, they will still be able to progress.

Will never happen though due to commercial reasons. I just think it's very poor for the Icc to say they are cutting down the number of teams for the next World Cup but keeping the elongated format to ensure a maximum number of games involving India.
Click to expand...
Well they sort of had that in 2007 4 groups of 4 then a 'super 8' stage but after India and Pakistan choked and got knocked out at the start causing a massive amount of $ of course the ICC canned it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Australian Cricket Awards
2
Replies
30
Views
1K
Around the Wicket
A
Wormkilla
Test Mediocre cricketers to play 100 tests
2
Replies
40
Views
1K
PhatBoy
PhatBoy
PhatBoy
Favourite cricket anecdotes
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
worbod
worbod
happy_eagle
Most important position in Cricket ?
Replies
15
Views
825
Gethelred
Gethelred
Wormkilla
T20I How do you statistically determine a good T20 cricketer?
Replies
13
Views
439
Around the Wicket
A
Richard Pryor
Matthew Wade retiring from red ball cricket
Replies
6
Views
643
PhatBoy
PhatBoy
grumbleguts
New Year's Cricket Idea.
Replies
0
Views
374
grumbleguts
grumbleguts

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top