ICC news November 24, 2011

Full Members opposed 10-team World Cup - Lorgat

  shares 64

Click to read the full interview that includes Lorgat's comments on the World Test Championship and the battle against corruption in cricket.

Haroon Lorgat, the ICC CEO, has said the 10 Full Members were unwilling to go through a qualification system for the 50-over World Cup, blocking plans for a 10-team event in 2015. "The main objection was that a 10-team event required Full Members to qualify," Lorgat told ESPNcricinfo.

He said Australia, New Zealand and England had initially supported a 10-team event with qualification but, following strong protests from the Associates, it was decided unanimously to do away with the idea for the next edition.

The ICC, before its annual conference in Hong Kong in June, had agreed at a meeting in April, to stick to just 10 teams in the 2015 World Cup but at Hong Kong, the ICC and its board members agreed to a 14-team tournament, preceded by a qualifying league for the Associate teams.

"Their belief was that there was a long-standing expectation that Full Members automatically play in the World Cup and therefore needed sufficient notice before we can change this practice. This is why the 10-team World Cup will start from 2019," Lorgat said.

However, Lorgat insisted a 10-team World Cup was the way forward. "I still believe that a 10-team World Cup on a qualification basis for all members would be a better event. This was part of the proposals to strategically restructure international cricket and was designed to protect and promote all three formats."

During his tenure as the CEO of the ICC, Lorgat faced many challenges. Among them was convincing the members of the ICC to institute the World Test Championship. Lorgat, who said earlier this month that the Test Championship will not be held before 2017, had strongly supported the idea of having a three-year qualification process during which all ten teams played each other, before the top four participated in a play-off. The Test Championship was meant to replace the Champions Trophy, the ICC's other 50-over event. However, monetary concerns expressed by ICC's broadcasting partner ESPN STAR Sports*, who have an agreement with the governing body until 2015, presented an obstacle. It did not help that the ten Full Members, once again, did not come out in support.

"A balanced mindset would have been a lot better," Lorgat said when asked if the members could have looked beyond short-term monetary gains. "Money is clearly an important factor but it should not be the only factor. We looked at different models of evaluating the revenue implications but the fact of the matter is that the value of an inaugural Test Championship comprising four teams and fewer matches is not viewed commercially the same as the Champions Trophy comprising eight teams."

Lorgat said the ICC had thought about renegotiating the broadcasting deal wherein they would pay ESPN STAR Sports the money it owed for the Champions Trophy as a measure to go all-out in staging the Test Championships, but found no support from the ICC board. "This was considered but not supported by the ICC Board and the Chief Executives Committee."

Evidently the ICC executive, of which Lorgat was the head, had limited powers and could not quell the might of the board members. "It is not ideal when you are not sufficiently empowered to undertake or implement what you know is correct and must be done. But I understood that when I entered the ICC and it is why the ICC Board rather than the executive would be held accountable for the future of the game."

The spot-fixing scandal during the Lord's Test between England and Pakistan in 2010 was another major challenge. An ICC tribunal found Pakistan's Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir guilty of spot fixing and banned them for various durations before they were sentenced to imprisonment after a separate trial at the Southwark Crown Court. The scandal raised questions about the ability of the ICC's Anti-Corruption and Security Unit to fight corruption and prompted calls for the ICC to invest in sting operations to tackle fixing.

Lorgat, however, said the ACSU's jurisdiction did not allow it to conduct sting operations. "We cannot carry out sting operations or arrest people or seize property. That is not within our remit or powers. This was made clear by the Members when the ACSU was established.

"Corruption is a serious challenge and we must not be complacent but remain vigilant to combat this menace."

*ESPN STAR Sports is a 50:50 joint venture between Walt Disney (ESPN, Inc.), the parent company of ESPNcricinfo, and News Corporation Limited (STAR)

Nagraj Gollapudi is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • OnlyKaps on November 25, 2011, 21:26 GMT

    Guys dont u get it ? The full members positions like in a horse race are already determined for the 2015 world cup. How can they now be asked to go through qualification ? Lorgat is pulling out the same hackneyed stuff " "Corruption is a serious challenge and we must not be complacent but remain vigilant to combat this menace." Lorgat ..mate you need to do something, nothing happens by itself

  • on November 25, 2011, 20:00 GMT

    Top 8 teams will automatically qualify, and are divided into two groups A and B. The bottom two regular teams will be further divided into two VIRTUAL groups X and Y, along with 4 associates, i.e. each X and Y group will consist of 3 teams each. The topper of group X will join group A, and the topper of group Y will join group B. Thus, ultimately groups A and B will have 5 teams each. Then, the top three teams from each group play in the super sixes (with points & victories carried over). Then the semis, and the final. 6 matches in the virtual groups, 20 in the main groups, 9 in super sixes, 2 semis and 1 final make it 38 matches in total.The tournament can be finished in 5 weeks, top teams need not play the associates directly, and associates get their fair chance to play as well.

  • spiritwithin on November 25, 2011, 14:02 GMT

    @spence1324...is it a norm to cry foul of BCCI on each and every matter??except ENG,Aus and NZ all the other full members opposed the 10team WC,and the reason for scrapping the 10team format is bcoz of strong opposition from associates not BCCI,u r naive enough to even think that india will need help from Lorgat to get selected for WC coz in the qualifying format each team wont play a knockout format but will play many matches with associates,even if one surprise defeats lingers for test nation once in a blue moon it will be hard to stop the test playing nation from qualifying..its better if u worry about Eng team who lost to BD and Ireland in a single WC event rather than worrying for BCCI...

  • on November 25, 2011, 9:53 GMT

    The World Cup should become a 20-team event similar to the Rugby World Cup. Top 12 automatically qualify. Others fight for 8 positions. Four groups of five teams, top 2 qualify, and then we have quarters. If cricket needs to survive, it needs a global fan base, and that comes when different teams get opportunities, just like in football

  • Baundele on November 25, 2011, 7:15 GMT

    Qualification for all (like soccer) will make the world cup truely global. Weaker teams will get the chance to play with stronger teams without producing one-sided boring matches in the world cup.

  • heathrf1974 on November 25, 2011, 4:27 GMT

    The previous world cup format was fine. I like some of the minnows in the WC, it adds to the uniqueness and interest of the competition. If you reduce down to ten you will pretty much have the same 10 teams each tournament without any consideration for development of the game.

  • on November 25, 2011, 2:57 GMT

    Amazing to see that people with such understanding of cricket are at the helm of affairs. How have we concluded that a 10 team WC is the best way to go forward. Cricket is no soccer. At least not at the moment.At first its not fair to expect that associates will upset big guns to get on this stage where they can showcase their cricket.For a moment if we assume they upset, can there be more than one team per edition pulling such feat.And if they do, do you expect that audience wants to watch Canada Vs Afghanistan and USA vs China when they havent seen them over the last 4 years. Please consider the fact that cricket following is big in Bangladesh, Sri lanka, Pakistan and India and surviving in Australia, England, WI, SA, NZ and barely managing in Zimbabwe. With that kind of following dont get over ambitious of making it a soccer world cup at a smaller scale.The first premise of 10 team being the best format looks flawed.A 12, 14 or even 16 team WC should work well.

  • johntycodes on November 25, 2011, 0:48 GMT

    I don't like the 10 teams. It's supposed to be the world cup where many many nations get together. In soccer they keep increasing the numbers because there is more excitement. Never mind the fact that at least half the soccer teams have no chance of winning it, it's just good to be there. If they only want 10 teams it's not really a world cup it's like a champions league playoffs tournament.

  • Dilmah82 on November 24, 2011, 23:59 GMT

    Regardless of the number of teams, the only way to make cricket fully global and fair is to make ALL teams qualify. I guess if you were to make any exceptions it could be that the defending champion automatically qualifies. Really it's not that difficult for the big test teams so I don't see what they are complaining about! Other global sports fo it this way!

  • on November 24, 2011, 23:51 GMT

    How do you rate the logic of a man who ignores the outrage of 96 of his member countries but then suspends plans because 10 other members feel uncomfortable?

  • OnlyKaps on November 25, 2011, 21:26 GMT

    Guys dont u get it ? The full members positions like in a horse race are already determined for the 2015 world cup. How can they now be asked to go through qualification ? Lorgat is pulling out the same hackneyed stuff " "Corruption is a serious challenge and we must not be complacent but remain vigilant to combat this menace." Lorgat ..mate you need to do something, nothing happens by itself

  • on November 25, 2011, 20:00 GMT

    Top 8 teams will automatically qualify, and are divided into two groups A and B. The bottom two regular teams will be further divided into two VIRTUAL groups X and Y, along with 4 associates, i.e. each X and Y group will consist of 3 teams each. The topper of group X will join group A, and the topper of group Y will join group B. Thus, ultimately groups A and B will have 5 teams each. Then, the top three teams from each group play in the super sixes (with points & victories carried over). Then the semis, and the final. 6 matches in the virtual groups, 20 in the main groups, 9 in super sixes, 2 semis and 1 final make it 38 matches in total.The tournament can be finished in 5 weeks, top teams need not play the associates directly, and associates get their fair chance to play as well.

  • spiritwithin on November 25, 2011, 14:02 GMT

    @spence1324...is it a norm to cry foul of BCCI on each and every matter??except ENG,Aus and NZ all the other full members opposed the 10team WC,and the reason for scrapping the 10team format is bcoz of strong opposition from associates not BCCI,u r naive enough to even think that india will need help from Lorgat to get selected for WC coz in the qualifying format each team wont play a knockout format but will play many matches with associates,even if one surprise defeats lingers for test nation once in a blue moon it will be hard to stop the test playing nation from qualifying..its better if u worry about Eng team who lost to BD and Ireland in a single WC event rather than worrying for BCCI...

  • on November 25, 2011, 9:53 GMT

    The World Cup should become a 20-team event similar to the Rugby World Cup. Top 12 automatically qualify. Others fight for 8 positions. Four groups of five teams, top 2 qualify, and then we have quarters. If cricket needs to survive, it needs a global fan base, and that comes when different teams get opportunities, just like in football

  • Baundele on November 25, 2011, 7:15 GMT

    Qualification for all (like soccer) will make the world cup truely global. Weaker teams will get the chance to play with stronger teams without producing one-sided boring matches in the world cup.

  • heathrf1974 on November 25, 2011, 4:27 GMT

    The previous world cup format was fine. I like some of the minnows in the WC, it adds to the uniqueness and interest of the competition. If you reduce down to ten you will pretty much have the same 10 teams each tournament without any consideration for development of the game.

  • on November 25, 2011, 2:57 GMT

    Amazing to see that people with such understanding of cricket are at the helm of affairs. How have we concluded that a 10 team WC is the best way to go forward. Cricket is no soccer. At least not at the moment.At first its not fair to expect that associates will upset big guns to get on this stage where they can showcase their cricket.For a moment if we assume they upset, can there be more than one team per edition pulling such feat.And if they do, do you expect that audience wants to watch Canada Vs Afghanistan and USA vs China when they havent seen them over the last 4 years. Please consider the fact that cricket following is big in Bangladesh, Sri lanka, Pakistan and India and surviving in Australia, England, WI, SA, NZ and barely managing in Zimbabwe. With that kind of following dont get over ambitious of making it a soccer world cup at a smaller scale.The first premise of 10 team being the best format looks flawed.A 12, 14 or even 16 team WC should work well.

  • johntycodes on November 25, 2011, 0:48 GMT

    I don't like the 10 teams. It's supposed to be the world cup where many many nations get together. In soccer they keep increasing the numbers because there is more excitement. Never mind the fact that at least half the soccer teams have no chance of winning it, it's just good to be there. If they only want 10 teams it's not really a world cup it's like a champions league playoffs tournament.

  • Dilmah82 on November 24, 2011, 23:59 GMT

    Regardless of the number of teams, the only way to make cricket fully global and fair is to make ALL teams qualify. I guess if you were to make any exceptions it could be that the defending champion automatically qualifies. Really it's not that difficult for the big test teams so I don't see what they are complaining about! Other global sports fo it this way!

  • on November 24, 2011, 23:51 GMT

    How do you rate the logic of a man who ignores the outrage of 96 of his member countries but then suspends plans because 10 other members feel uncomfortable?

  • johnathonjosephs on November 24, 2011, 23:46 GMT

    Believe it or not, this is the way to go. Bangladesh is the only country that can be probably routed by the likes of Zimbabwe, Ireland, and Netherlands. My idea? Make the ranking systems count. Have the top 6 in any ranking system qualify for the following WC (top 6 in T20/ODI/Test ranking qualify automatically, but the rest must qualify by playing other teams for T20/ODI/Test World Cup).

  • dragqueen1 on November 24, 2011, 22:14 GMT

    Q. why do sports have World Cups? Obvious, you'd think, to find the best team, surely, well yes & no. that is one reason but it ISN'T the main reason. in the 21st Century the main reason for holding World Cups is to get as much focus on the sport in the international media as possible, to export interest in the sport, to inspire people to take up the sport. all a bit pointless, having one, if you reduce the numbers to a bare minimum & won't let anyone else play. i simply despair with the ICC they simply have no idea where they're going with this sport.

  • JG2704 on November 24, 2011, 21:58 GMT

    Here's my idea. You have a 16 team tournament. 10 teams Aus,Bang,Eng,Ind,NZ ,Pak,SA,SL,WI,Zim who automatically qualify. Then Hol,Ire,Can,Ken,Sco,USA,Nam,UAE etc playing for the 6 places.I select these 10 as automatic because all regularly play test cricket whereas others don't and are not so time restricted. Some might say too many teams , too many games etc. What Id say to that is finalists would play 3 less matches than in the last WC this way.I'd have 4 groups of 4 with the 8 top nations being split (2 in each group).So you have 3 group matches per team with the top 2 from each group qualifying , then the top team from 1 group playing a 2nd placed team from another in the QFs,then the SFs then the final.I believe last year In/SL both played 9 matches in total.This way the finalists would play 6. If we want the game to grow/spread the game surely cutting it to 10 teams is the wrong way to go.Ire beating Eng/Pak, Kenya beating WI etc. This is the beauty of the WC in any sport

  • SirViv1973 on November 24, 2011, 21:02 GMT

    Personally I would like to see a 12 team tournament. I would have 2 pools of 6 teams each playing each other once. At the end of the pool stage the 2 bottom teams in each pool would be eliminated . I would then have a series of playoffs, 3rd would play 4th from the other pool with the loosers being eliminated 1st would play 2nd from the other pool with the winner going through to the semis and the looser getting another chance against the winners of the 3rd/4th place matches, then semis and final. This would be a total of 39 games which could be played in 4 - 5 wks. I think a lot of people tend to loose a bit of interest when the tournament drags on for 7 weeks.

  • kriskini on November 24, 2011, 20:05 GMT

    Please understad this. All the ODI matches played bfore 2015 world cup can be considered like qualifying rounds since top 6 teams no need to qualify. Any full meber team falls in last 4 ODI ranking list deserve to play qualifying ronds with associates.

  • on November 24, 2011, 20:01 GMT

    What Haroon does not understand is what if India does not qualify. Who will sponsor/fund the tournament. Without a billion viewers, Cricket WC will hardly be an event. Until cricket gets a wider appeal like FIFA it is a big mistake to even consider the qualification round. Yes the Irish team gets qualified but can they replace a billion viewers. The full members have committed to the game more so than the associate members. If India had qualified for the 07 WC we would not even have this debate. The first round exit followed by India winning T20 WC suddenly made T20 more appealing than ODI. Instead Haroon should work on qualifying China for 2019 WC. Imagine a India-China clash for the world cup final. Good Bye FIFA.

  • spence1324 on November 24, 2011, 19:26 GMT

    COME on lorget it was not ENG,AUS AND SA that did not want to qualify you are covering for a board that starts in B and ends in I!

  • on November 24, 2011, 18:55 GMT

    Simplest formula: Bring in 16 teams, divide them in a group of 4,,,, top 2 of each group qualify forsecond round (i.e. total 24 matches in first round). In second round, each team plays against each other (except the one in round 1) which means 24 more great matchs of round 2. Top 4 play semi and then the final. This would be the excellent format with 51 games in all.

  • Garretjacks on November 24, 2011, 18:25 GMT

    We need alot more teams than 10.... Allow other small countries to also take part or how else can the world see their potential? ICC hardly makes any of the test teams to play againts weaker sides and even if they do it is only 1 or 2 ODIs..... Please lets give the minnows an opportunity to improve and prove themselves.....

  • Third_Gear on November 24, 2011, 17:42 GMT

    To make the issue short,why not 12 Teams??? 10 full members participates without qualifiers and other two teams from associates who win ICC Trophy and runner up.

  • M_Rakibul_Islam on November 24, 2011, 16:33 GMT

    At least 14 teams should b there. But nothing wrong with 16 teams. Ire & Ned r very good teams. Kenya have potential & they showed it against Aussies in last WC. Even Scottish, Canadians & Afghans have the potentials of making upsets. But if ICC don't give the opportunities then full members will remain unbeatable by Associates. Only opportunities can help them to grow. In Soccer WC we see boring matches between Brazil vs Saudi Arabia or something like this. But Brazil or Spain won't criticize FIFA for 32 teams WC. So why do the big brothers of Cricket oppose 16 teams?? At least 6-10 associates have potential to become a full members nation within 1-2 decades provided that they r given enough chances to compete with strong nations more often. So top 10 Associates should participate in a Qualifier tournament & 4/6 of them must participate in upcoming WC.

  • motiur_rahman on November 24, 2011, 15:53 GMT

    I am from Bangladesh and I support the idea of the last 4 team in the 10 team to go for qualification ; in that Bangladesh will know that there are better team than them and would not stay in the bottom for ever . Unfortunately , ICC has ruined it .

  • Desihungama on November 24, 2011, 15:44 GMT

    It's utter non sense and idiotic to have only a 10 team WC. What is it big boys play while little guy drools? WC generate excitement due to surprise wins by smaller teams and they should be given all the opportunities. Who else they are going to improve. Again, very silly idea by Lorgat. No vision at all by ICC.

  • on November 24, 2011, 15:30 GMT

    How is it that the Baseball World Cup can accommodate 22 teams and yet the ICC want the Cricket World Cup to fall to 10 teams? The ICC should be ashamed of themselves for turning a world game into their own private money-spinner. 90% of players, coaches and cricket fans are against this. It will do generational damage to the game. We need new leadership at the ICC - cricketers who are in the job to better cricket, not a bunch of accountants there to better their own bank accounts.

  • mits6 on November 24, 2011, 15:00 GMT

    While going thru comments i found people saying India will not qualify thru qualifiers ,probably due to what happened in 2007 WC , then going by that theory Pak will also fail to qualify .one of mate also said that ENG & BD will also donot qualify & SA will choke thru qualifiers ......this is heights mate .U have freedom to express & speak do not mean u make baseless and absolutely absurd comments.

  • on November 24, 2011, 14:56 GMT

    i like the idea of Test champion ship ..but i never thought it would entirely replace championship trophy....and this part is not good becoz championship ship trophy has its own place in the cricket history.... either icc should go both or just hvae the champion trophy

  • 2.14istherunrate on November 24, 2011, 14:43 GMT

    I do not think it matters whether it is a 10 or eleven team event, inasmuch as i would let the Irish in anyway, based on merit. What seems to be the basic nub of the argument though is to have a round robin tournament before the semis. it is so much the best format and saves on a lot of silly cricket being played.( so much of the early round play otherwise is unappetisingly tedious and predictable.)This would avoid the uncomfortable process of quallifiers, and create a high intensity tournament which feels competitive like 1992, the best WC so far. As collateral the Irish would have to get their act together to assume Full status asap.

  • ShahbazSalamat on November 24, 2011, 14:30 GMT

    We Want to C more Competition in WC ...So Add more Teams

  • just_Test_lover on November 24, 2011, 14:10 GMT

    The ICC need to weigh up do they want the USA and China to be part of the game or not. Imagine China and the potential financial prospect of 2 Billion extra viewers if China could make the World Cup! India would be a small fry!

    ICC need to use the next world cup to guarentee the top 8 teams a spot in 2019 then create a qualifying period 2015 - 2018 for another 6 teams. Only the best should get in. No spots per continent as in soccer.

    or have a qualifying process for 16 next best teams to play for 4 spots (9 - 12) teams play each other home and away in a 3 ODI series over a 3 year period before 2019. Then in the begining of 2019 a month before the world cup have a final qualifying tounament for th 2 remaining spots with the 6 best teams not in the WC. This creates a lot more matches for the smaller teams and if a top team hasn't qualified they need to go this route and play these smaller teams giving these teams an extra motivation to play well!

  • on November 24, 2011, 13:53 GMT

    10 team world cup will bring out the world champion...14 team wc sucks

  • on November 24, 2011, 13:40 GMT

    10 already fixed teams for ICC cup......oops where is world on that......

  • on November 24, 2011, 13:37 GMT

    I DOUBT THIS EVENT WILL EVER TAKE PLACE,THE IDEA IS GREEEAAART

  • CricketPissek on November 24, 2011, 13:34 GMT

    What the ICC wants is 9 teams to qualify and join India ;)

  • Saadatullah on November 24, 2011, 13:33 GMT

    The world is not just 10 teams, If you want to improve cricket in the world so leave the world in the world cups, If you abseve Afghanistan after their participation in T20 world games of 2010 more than 70% of youngster are playing cricket here instead less than 10% were playing cricket here before 6 years.

  • on November 24, 2011, 13:33 GMT

    JUST USE THE SAME 14 TEAM FORMAT AND CUT IT DOWN TO 12 TEAMS-PERFECT-10 PLUS 2 QUALIFIERS, FAIR!. 10 IS TOO LITTLE AND WITH 10, U ONLY GET 3 KNOCK-OUT GAMES-PATHETIC.

  • on November 24, 2011, 13:04 GMT

    I think they should have as many teams as possible and give the bigger teams opportunities to play smaller teams for the qualifying rounds. The qualifying rounds can be spread out over a period of time. The main part of the tournament should come down to 8 teams playing in the quarter finals and then 4 in the semi finals and the 2 in the finals. The problem I'm seeing is that players committed to IPL and other money drawing leagues may not make themselves available.

  • maddy20 on November 24, 2011, 13:03 GMT

    @doncl We are two times World Champions and are sitting pretty at no.2 mate. So worry about your own team(which I guess is England)! Silly poms.

  • on November 24, 2011, 12:59 GMT

    It likes Champion Trophy = WC 2015 only top 10 teams play world cup

  • satish619chandar on November 24, 2011, 12:50 GMT

    @durhamd : I do agree.. But if you need everything consistent, can play in tracks like Mumbai.. Where is the challenge for the batsman in normal pitches.. Every track has its own specialty and respect it.. Scoring 100 in India doesn't get the same applaud from some quarters as the 100 scored on a fine sunny day in Lords where there will be no assistance to any bowler(Under bright sunshine).. Why brand subcontinent tracks as flat ones and only the tracks in some countries as challenging ones? I am not defending the Mumbai track where a dumb test is played now but defending the pitch which was reported poor in SL.. Spin is also a art and playing spin is also challenging for any batsman..

  • S4CHIN_IS_GOD on November 24, 2011, 12:45 GMT

    Haroon lorgat forgot its not football. He needs to reach all the nations first and get atleast 40-50 different countries. then select top 10-16 teams. I enjoyed 1996 world cup 16 teams, 4 groups, top 8 go through, quaterfinals, semis and final. that way top team on that day can win. Simple. Why complicate?

  • on November 24, 2011, 12:43 GMT

    10 teams playing with one match with each team wud have been a great great world cup like 92 but unfortunatly nobody understand.

  • doncl on November 24, 2011, 12:41 GMT

    In a 10 member tournament and if India doesn't make the cut, GOD help ICC.

  • Zahidsaltin on November 24, 2011, 12:40 GMT

    @Colm Mooney, there are many games which do just that. Ice hockey has a A leauge and B league of qualifiers.

  • Zahidsaltin on November 24, 2011, 12:39 GMT

    10 team? 12? or how many. Its all desired and decided with dollar signes in their eyes. So lets talk their way. You want last 5 full member to play qualifiers, right? What if the then new look india (after mass retirements of big guns) loses its qualification to Holland, Ireland or any other associate? ICC will be ruined, I guess. So answer is 12 teams. two associates and 10 permanent.

  • on November 24, 2011, 12:38 GMT

    Its silly that the cricket would be limited to 10 full-members. Does it at all encourage the beautiful game cricket.

  • Fast_Track_Bully on November 24, 2011, 12:24 GMT

    if it is qualification for everyone based on continent as it is in Football, teams like Ireland and Afgan will qualify instead of teams like England and BD! And chances of SA choking in qualifier too!

  • satish619chandar on November 24, 2011, 11:58 GMT

    Having qualifier for all the teams might not be good as if any big nation didn't make it, it will be heavy loss to ICC.. Supposed to be small nations like BD and Zim has a strong support in home.. Why should we neglect those fans.. For Cricket to come a soccer, it ll take more time.. 12 team with 3 qualifiers along with other 9 teams should be good.. One hand, we fans want Ireland to be a full nation and demand more matches for them and Netherlands so that they can improve.. Now if you reject from Worldcup, they wont have any motivation to play itself..

  • on November 24, 2011, 11:57 GMT

    10 team World Cup was a very stupid idea in the first place. There are not enough number of teams to organize qualifiers. Associates members take the WC very seriously and a 10 team WC will lead to the destruction of cricketing spirit in many countries. Change is not always good. It's a dumb idea that I believe will never come into effect, not even in 2019. It's not a step forward, it's a step backward.

  • anver777 on November 24, 2011, 11:53 GMT

    Yes Sir.... No Sir.... ICC must take a firm decision & must stick to that !!!! no point changing all the time !!!!!

  • Lees_Legends on November 24, 2011, 11:45 GMT

    No Anubhav. Minnows will get less opportunites

  • Ayanmalik on November 24, 2011, 11:38 GMT

    Qulification of the team is a good idea. I would sugguest that top 5 or 6 teams should be included rest should play a qualification round. This way the minows would get prepared to compete better. Otherwise minows would remain minows and would never get to level of test playing nations and the WC would always be bored and this game would only resticted to 10 or 8 nations. If ICC is a governing body they should implement such kind of formats for the WC alteast.

  • on November 24, 2011, 11:31 GMT

    This is not fair at all... Minnows should play the 50 over WC.

  • AusieBangaleeShameem on November 24, 2011, 11:29 GMT

    All teams must play for qualifier ---- except current champion. Otherwise, WC should be played by 10 full members plus 6 associates. Thanks and full-stop.

    Regarding test championship, all teams must face each other home-away seres then top 4 will play final round of championship. Does it sound good? Please comment --- constructive comments are expected from the followers.

  • mojo121 on November 24, 2011, 11:21 GMT

    Lorgat wanna destroy cricket he should make more teams and he is trying to cut it off teams if low team do not play with good teams how they gonna get better? If he keep the cricket upto Ten teams cricket will never get better

  • durhamd on November 24, 2011, 11:19 GMT

    @satish I think it's more to do with the consistency of the bounce, not the height of the bounce itself.

  • on November 24, 2011, 11:03 GMT

    So there is a sport where you qualify by right because your in the big boys club?, I could be wrong, but is there any other sports where even the big boys don't have to qualify?, even Brazil in football have to...

  • on November 24, 2011, 10:58 GMT

    Same format as soccer world cups. 32 teams, except the test playing nations should auto-qualify.

  • ahilcool on November 24, 2011, 10:36 GMT

    nice joke icc lol this is really funny

  • Heisenburg on November 24, 2011, 10:35 GMT

    This is stupid, Every team should have to qualify.

  • on November 24, 2011, 10:25 GMT

    10-team well Cup is retrograde. It should be 12 minimum - with only the top 6 full members pre-qualified.

  • wafiq on November 24, 2011, 10:24 GMT

    nice to hear this from ICC

  • on November 24, 2011, 10:20 GMT

    10 team format will be good. Since minnows will get more opportunities.

  • on November 24, 2011, 10:19 GMT

    Even though i'm relieved that there will be a 14 team World Cup in 2015, how can limiting the World Cup to 10 teams (or the World Twenty20 to 12 for that matter) be in the long-term interests of the global game as a whole? A 16 team World Cup (2 groups of 8, top 4 in each group into Quarter-finals) and a 20 team World Twenty20 (4 groups of 5 top 2 in each group into Quarter-finals) should be mandatory if the ICC is serious about looking after the interests of all 95 members rather than just making money for the 10 test nations.

  • satish619chandar on November 24, 2011, 10:19 GMT

    And regarding the test championship, the nations will start to produce the pitches home advantage.. Eng, SA, NZ and Aus will get away preparing bouncy tracks and the pitches in subcontinent will be hailed as under prepared or dangerous to batsmen.. How in the world will you consider a ball which hits the pad as unsafe on e and the one with extra bounce hits the glove or head a safe one? No one can answer this!! And, you ll expect the boards from the sub continent to be quiet and dance to your tunes?

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • satish619chandar on November 24, 2011, 10:19 GMT

    And regarding the test championship, the nations will start to produce the pitches home advantage.. Eng, SA, NZ and Aus will get away preparing bouncy tracks and the pitches in subcontinent will be hailed as under prepared or dangerous to batsmen.. How in the world will you consider a ball which hits the pad as unsafe on e and the one with extra bounce hits the glove or head a safe one? No one can answer this!! And, you ll expect the boards from the sub continent to be quiet and dance to your tunes?

  • on November 24, 2011, 10:19 GMT

    Even though i'm relieved that there will be a 14 team World Cup in 2015, how can limiting the World Cup to 10 teams (or the World Twenty20 to 12 for that matter) be in the long-term interests of the global game as a whole? A 16 team World Cup (2 groups of 8, top 4 in each group into Quarter-finals) and a 20 team World Twenty20 (4 groups of 5 top 2 in each group into Quarter-finals) should be mandatory if the ICC is serious about looking after the interests of all 95 members rather than just making money for the 10 test nations.

  • on November 24, 2011, 10:20 GMT

    10 team format will be good. Since minnows will get more opportunities.

  • wafiq on November 24, 2011, 10:24 GMT

    nice to hear this from ICC

  • on November 24, 2011, 10:25 GMT

    10-team well Cup is retrograde. It should be 12 minimum - with only the top 6 full members pre-qualified.

  • Heisenburg on November 24, 2011, 10:35 GMT

    This is stupid, Every team should have to qualify.

  • ahilcool on November 24, 2011, 10:36 GMT

    nice joke icc lol this is really funny

  • on November 24, 2011, 10:58 GMT

    Same format as soccer world cups. 32 teams, except the test playing nations should auto-qualify.

  • on November 24, 2011, 11:03 GMT

    So there is a sport where you qualify by right because your in the big boys club?, I could be wrong, but is there any other sports where even the big boys don't have to qualify?, even Brazil in football have to...

  • durhamd on November 24, 2011, 11:19 GMT

    @satish I think it's more to do with the consistency of the bounce, not the height of the bounce itself.