What should be the format of the World Cup?

What should be the format of the World Cup?


  • Total voters
    50

(Log in to remove this ad.)

boncer34

Inaugural Steward
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Posts
40,789
Likes
40,701
Location
Baghdad
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Melbourne Storm
#52
While I don't disagree, I get that the ICC really can't afford a repeat of 2007 right now. I figure at least with groups of five, India can't claim that they missed the finals because of the format.



I don't think it is. Imagine a World Cup as follows:

Code:
Group A               Group B        Group C       Group D
India                 South Africa   England       New Zealand
Pakistan              Bangladesh     Sri Lanka     Australia
Ireland               Afghanistan    West Indies   Zimbabwe
Hong Kong             Netherlands    Scotland      Papua New Guinea
United Arab Emirates  Nepal          Canada        Namibia
This was drawn randomly by seeding the top 20 teams in groups of four. Now, would I expect the lowest ranked team to beat the top team? Not at all. But I could see the second team beating the first. And the third team beating the second and the first. And the fourth team beating the third and the second. And the fifth team beating the fourth and the third. It's no guarantee, but at least one of those groups would throw up something unexpected.

This is the format that the Rugby World Cup uses, and I think the cricket teams could put up a better show than the rugby teams.
Hang on, in our group are we top or New Zealand? Coz if we're the 2nd team and you can see Zimbabwe or PNG beating us I want whatever it is your on. :p
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2011
Posts
28,056
Likes
20,453
Location
Australia
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Fremantle, WA, Associates
Thread starter #53
Hang on, in our group are we top or New Zealand? Coz if we're the 2nd team and you can see Zimbabwe or PNG beating us I want whatever it is your on. :p
Australia is currently ranked 5th in the world. It was a quirk of the random generator that it put the strongest 2nd tier team and (probably) the weakest 3rd tier team in the same group, but you can see what I mean in the other three groups, and with the rest of group D.

Having said that: http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/...stralia-4th-match-triangular-tournament-2014/
 

Wolfs

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Posts
6,545
Likes
3,346
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Memphis Grizzlies, Hertha Berlin
#54
16 teams, 4 groups of 4 then QF, SF and F.

Basically 2007 without the Super 8 ****.
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2011
Posts
28,056
Likes
20,453
Location
Australia
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Fremantle, WA, Associates
Thread starter #56
With only 3 games in the group stage, what if there is a washed out game? (or in somewhere like England even 2!) Opens the door too much for a team getting lucky.
Letting the rare chance of bad weather in the middle of summer affect the size of groups seems like a bit much though.
 

big_e

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Posts
4,453
Likes
11,028
Location
Your Wi-Fi
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Wycombe Wanderers, 76ers
#57
16 teams, 4 groups of 4 then QF, SF and F.

Basically 2007 without the Super 8 ****.
Super 8 is too much, don't mind Super 6. Reduces the possible impact of a very good side missing out because of one bad day, and therefore means we have more chance of getting the best sides in the semis and final.
 

Gough

Moderator
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Posts
40,995
Likes
67,181
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Moderator #58
Just had a look at the format of the first World Cup, two groups of four but they had the group stage done with inside a week. Australia played three games in the week 7-14 June 1975.
 

Kram

I'll brik u
Joined
May 2, 2007
Posts
53,513
Likes
67,178
Location
WA
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Chicago Bears, de Boer, Arsenal
#61
Letting the rare chance of bad weather in the middle of summer affect the size of groups seems like a bit much though.
3 group games just isn't enough, and maybe washouts aren't common but hardly unheard of either.

2 x groups of 7 is fine imo, just instead of quarter finals 1st goes straight through to the semi and 2 v 3 playoff for the other spot. Makes the group stage more important and competitive.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Mar 5, 2011
Posts
28,056
Likes
20,453
Location
Australia
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Fremantle, WA, Associates
Thread starter #62
3 group games isn't enough, and washout aren't common but hardly unheard of either.

2 x groups of 7 is fine imo, just instead of quarter finals 1st goes straight through to the semi and 2 v 3 playoff for the other spot. Makes the group stage more important and competitive.
It's too far in the other direction. Five or six is reasonable. Seven smooths out the results too much.
 

Howard Littlejohn

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 30, 2006
Posts
13,427
Likes
6,806
Location
Canberra
AFL Club
North Melbourne
#64
I like the 3x5 with Super Six suggestion.
Four group games doesn't drag things out too long, gives some coverage in case of weather, and two of five going through means the last round of games will probably have meaning for some teams.
Four games in the super 6. With a super 6 there is not really a need for semis (except $), it could go straight to a final to shave a few days off the length.
 

SS3840

Debutant
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Posts
63
Likes
48
Location
Morwell
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Calgary Flames, Toronto Raptors
#65
I'd keep it simple
16 teams 4 groups of 4.

The 12 Test nations, 3 in each group, plus one associate team in each group. Drawn at random, like teams ranked 1 through 4 via ICC rankings drawn into groups, then 5 through 8 and so on.

Each team in the group plays each other once, top two from each group go into the quarter finals 1A v. 2B, 1B v. 2A etc., followed by the semis and the final.
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2011
Posts
28,056
Likes
20,453
Location
Australia
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Fremantle, WA, Associates
Thread starter #66
I'd keep it simple
16 teams 4 groups of 4.

The 12 Test nations, 3 in each group, plus one associate team in each group. Drawn at random, like teams ranked 1 through 4 via ICC rankings drawn into groups, then 5 through 8 and so on.

Each team in the group plays each other once, top two from each group go into the quarter finals 1A v. 2B, 1B v. 2A etc., followed by the semis and the final.
While I agree, there won't be groups of four any time soon, which is why I've put forward a 20 team WC with groups of five instead, but otherwise exactly the same. In the case of 2019, it would just mean adding one of the UAE, Nepal, Canada and Namibia to each group.
 

SS3840

Debutant
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Posts
63
Likes
48
Location
Morwell
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Calgary Flames, Toronto Raptors
#67
While I agree, there won't be groups of four any time soon, which is why I've put forward a 20 team WC with groups of five instead, but otherwise exactly the same. In the case of 2019, it would just mean adding one of the UAE, Nepal, Canada and Namibia to each group.
I'm aware of that, but we were asked what it will be, but what it should be. And I answered. That said, being a fan of most things Canadian, anyway they can get into the World Cup is fine with me.
 

Marklar_33

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Posts
21,965
Likes
12,667
Location
Tas
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
D'Backs, Hurricanes
#68
Seeing the results in these qualifiers, I’m inclined to want a World Cup of 2 groups of 8, or 3 groups of 6! The more matches between Associates, or Associates vs lower ranked full nations, the better!
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2011
Posts
28,056
Likes
20,453
Location
Australia
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Fremantle, WA, Associates
Thread starter #72
No quarter-finals please. Makes the back end of the tournament too flukey and the front end a waste of time.
While I sympathise with this to some extent, imagine if there were quarter-finals in 2007 instead of the tedious and uninteresting super eights? Using their results from that stage, matches as follows:

A1 vs B2
Australia vs Bangladesh
Australia win by 10 wickets

A2 vs B1
South Africa vs Sri Lanka
South Africa win by 1 wicket with 10 balls remaining

C1 vs D2
New Zealand vs Ireland
New Zealand win by 129 runs

C2 vs D1
England vs West Indies
England win by 1 wicket with 1 ball remaining

Semi-finals

Australia vs England
Australia win by 7 wickets with 16 balls remaining

South Africa vs New Zealand
New Zealand win by 5 wickets with 10 balls remaining

Final

Australia vs New Zealand
Australia win by heaps

Isn't that a fairly compelling set of results compared to what we got?
 

IKnowtheDog

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jan 25, 2016
Posts
5,719
Likes
4,488
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Seattle Seahawks
#73
14 teams is enough.

Would be a good idea for Association countries to play test nations more often though.

No point in having association nations playing test nations in the world cups if they don't play them in non world cup competitions otherwise how will they improve.
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2011
Posts
28,056
Likes
20,453
Location
Australia
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Fremantle, WA, Associates
Thread starter #74
14 teams is enough.

Would be a good idea for Association countries to play test nations more often though.

No point in having association nations playing test nations in the world cups if they don't play them in non world cup competitions otherwise how will they improve.
Indeed. As I pointed out yesterday, between the end of the last World Cup and the start of these Qualifiers, the West Indies had played 35 ODIs against the top eight ODI nations. Scotland had played 0.
 

Cochblocked

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Posts
4,147
Likes
5,621
Location
Geelong
AFL Club
Gold Coast
#75
14 teams is enough.

Would be a good idea for Association countries to play test nations more often though.

No point in having association nations playing test nations in the world cups if they don't play them in non world cup competitions otherwise how will they improve.
I feel like with so many t20 leagues and long test series, there is just less and less time to fit in ODIs. Sadly this means the assocites get pushed to the back. Gotta say though good on Pakistan for playing in Ireland's first test then playing matches against Scotland.
 
Top Bottom