ICC news February 18, 2011

ICC sticks to plan for ten-team World Cup

ESPNcricinfo staff
65

Haroon Lorgat, the ICC chief executive, has said there will be no going back on the decision to reduce the 50-over World Cup from 14 to ten teams, despite protests from the Associate countries who are likely to be left out of the tournament in 2015.

"We have felt in the past few years that Twenty20 is the best format to develop the game world-wide and it provides a better environment for competition," Lorgat told PTI. "The 50-over format is more skill-based and suitable for the top teams."

To compensate for the loss of places in the 50-over tournament, the ICC has added four spots to the Twenty20 World Cup, making it a 16-team event, but Cricket Kenya chief executive, Tom Sears, told AFP that the ICC will not be acting in the interests of the game if the smaller teams were locked out of the next World Cup.

"If we have to improve on the standards, there is no point of denying us the opportunity of competing at the top level." Sears said. "We had a meeting with the other Associate countries during the World Cup training camp in Dubai last week, and we plan to raise the matter again at the World Cup. We are disturbed about the whole issue."

In an earlier interview with The Wisden Cricketer, Sears, called the decision "scandalous and bloody ridiculous", saying "I've no desire to be diplomatic... Not to let anyone else in is scandalous. It's all about money, power and votes - and that's not good for cricket."

Former Kenya captain Steve Tikolo and batsman Collins Obuya also voiced their concerns, saying the World Cup remained crucial for the development of the Associate countries. Kenya famously made the semi-finals in the 2003 World Cup, but remain the only non-Test team to have made it so far into the tournament.

Several leading players from the Full Member countries came out in support of the Associates as well, with England offspinner Graeme Swann asking: "Why would you want to take the world out of the World Cup?" He was joined by Australian fast bowler Shaun Tait, who said, "to play against the best players and sides in the world is massive and I wouldn't want to take that away from anyone," and South Africa wicketkeeper AB de Villiers, who saw value in the smaller nations' involvement in major tournaments. "It makes it more colourful and it's good for the growth of the game."

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • sairek11 on February 21, 2011, 10:09 GMT

    Its a brilliant move commercially....simply because it will be difficult to even fill up the stadiums for matches being played by test playing nations. Instead of going the FIFA way ICC is going the FAIL way.

  • RanaPirBD on February 21, 2011, 9:08 GMT

    Indiancurry11, if you say bangla and WI have the same skill as any other associates, u know nothing about cricket. u think associates cud make 283 against india? or u wanna say associates cud get a player like any of them WI players? and yes, um not a bangla nor a WI personnel. but u know what? truth is that, u sud learn more about international cricket than just IPL :)

  • parirani on February 21, 2011, 6:33 GMT

    each of all the associate teams of ODI should be FORCED to play, annually, at least 12 ODI with test playing nations and atleast 24 ODI among themselves. This way they will get exposure and good training to play for 2019 world-cup. wake up ICC, hire me and i will let you know how to manage the associates................................

  • Super_Cricketer on February 20, 2011, 8:27 GMT

    Hello ICC, If you have already decided to reduce the number of teams next world cup, then 12 team format is the best one.12 Teams, 2 Groups, QF, SF and Final. So there will be only 37 matches. Top 2 Associate nations will get the chance to play the world cup.....Thanks...

  • dr.saubhik on February 20, 2011, 6:22 GMT

    14 to 10 is reducing one third of the teams from world cup..thats too harsh...they cud have made it 14 to 12 teams...still leaving two spots for the associate countries to fill up...in this way both the length of the tournament would have been reduced and the two best associate countries would have got the chance of playing against the best teams in the world...icc would try n spread the game globally rather than restricting it to a few teams!!! football worls cup also started with 16 teams....but now 32 nations participate in football world cup..n all of them competitive enuf...all bcoz fifa took bold n risky decisions to spread the game worldwide...icc should b inspired by fifa...this particular decision by icc is definitely a step backward!!!

  • Indiancurry11 on February 20, 2011, 2:02 GMT

    Currently Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, West Indies are at same or similar levels as Ireland, Netherland and Kenya, so who should be there in top 10 and who should not. its best to have all the nations to play qualifiers just like in Soccer where even Brazil has to play to qualify

  • VivGilchrist on February 20, 2011, 0:46 GMT

    How can I get a job at the ICC. If they put me in charge of the tournament division, I would turn the World Cup, and Champions Trophy into two very different, successful, and relevant show-pieces of our game. But how and to who do I put my ideas forward?

  • VivGilchrist on February 20, 2011, 0:32 GMT

    Dumb move. Now, what is the difference between the World Cup and the Champions Trophy?

  • Vinod on February 19, 2011, 22:41 GMT

    ICC World Twenty20 Tournament should be re-branded as the Cricket World Cup. There should still be a World Event for the one-dayers for 10 test playing nations. My question is how ICC is addressing the one-day status given to certain teams ? Are they going to lose the one-day status ?

    ICC also should consider that there is too much volume of cricket being played these days. As a consumer for me cricket is fast losing the charm, because there is a overkill of cricket with a calendar year being packed with every possible tournament.

    ICC should be very selective about the tournaments it hosts. Players should get a break as well spectators who support their teams.

    The format of this World Cup is too long again. Instead of giving 6 0r 7 days of rest between matches, games should have been done with as early as possible. Again total mishandling of a mega event, which in itself losing its relevance because of too much cricket. ICC should go back to the drawing rooms and seriously think.

  • dragqueen1 on February 19, 2011, 19:36 GMT

    Vinod they have scrapped the next CWC & replaced it with the 'Champions' Trophy, though cunningly they've kept they CWC title just to con(fuse) everyone, if you follow, wish i did. Just when the ICC can't get worse they manage it, they surely are the incompetent(i'm being polite here) sporting organisation in the world.

  • sairek11 on February 21, 2011, 10:09 GMT

    Its a brilliant move commercially....simply because it will be difficult to even fill up the stadiums for matches being played by test playing nations. Instead of going the FIFA way ICC is going the FAIL way.

  • RanaPirBD on February 21, 2011, 9:08 GMT

    Indiancurry11, if you say bangla and WI have the same skill as any other associates, u know nothing about cricket. u think associates cud make 283 against india? or u wanna say associates cud get a player like any of them WI players? and yes, um not a bangla nor a WI personnel. but u know what? truth is that, u sud learn more about international cricket than just IPL :)

  • parirani on February 21, 2011, 6:33 GMT

    each of all the associate teams of ODI should be FORCED to play, annually, at least 12 ODI with test playing nations and atleast 24 ODI among themselves. This way they will get exposure and good training to play for 2019 world-cup. wake up ICC, hire me and i will let you know how to manage the associates................................

  • Super_Cricketer on February 20, 2011, 8:27 GMT

    Hello ICC, If you have already decided to reduce the number of teams next world cup, then 12 team format is the best one.12 Teams, 2 Groups, QF, SF and Final. So there will be only 37 matches. Top 2 Associate nations will get the chance to play the world cup.....Thanks...

  • dr.saubhik on February 20, 2011, 6:22 GMT

    14 to 10 is reducing one third of the teams from world cup..thats too harsh...they cud have made it 14 to 12 teams...still leaving two spots for the associate countries to fill up...in this way both the length of the tournament would have been reduced and the two best associate countries would have got the chance of playing against the best teams in the world...icc would try n spread the game globally rather than restricting it to a few teams!!! football worls cup also started with 16 teams....but now 32 nations participate in football world cup..n all of them competitive enuf...all bcoz fifa took bold n risky decisions to spread the game worldwide...icc should b inspired by fifa...this particular decision by icc is definitely a step backward!!!

  • Indiancurry11 on February 20, 2011, 2:02 GMT

    Currently Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, West Indies are at same or similar levels as Ireland, Netherland and Kenya, so who should be there in top 10 and who should not. its best to have all the nations to play qualifiers just like in Soccer where even Brazil has to play to qualify

  • VivGilchrist on February 20, 2011, 0:46 GMT

    How can I get a job at the ICC. If they put me in charge of the tournament division, I would turn the World Cup, and Champions Trophy into two very different, successful, and relevant show-pieces of our game. But how and to who do I put my ideas forward?

  • VivGilchrist on February 20, 2011, 0:32 GMT

    Dumb move. Now, what is the difference between the World Cup and the Champions Trophy?

  • Vinod on February 19, 2011, 22:41 GMT

    ICC World Twenty20 Tournament should be re-branded as the Cricket World Cup. There should still be a World Event for the one-dayers for 10 test playing nations. My question is how ICC is addressing the one-day status given to certain teams ? Are they going to lose the one-day status ?

    ICC also should consider that there is too much volume of cricket being played these days. As a consumer for me cricket is fast losing the charm, because there is a overkill of cricket with a calendar year being packed with every possible tournament.

    ICC should be very selective about the tournaments it hosts. Players should get a break as well spectators who support their teams.

    The format of this World Cup is too long again. Instead of giving 6 0r 7 days of rest between matches, games should have been done with as early as possible. Again total mishandling of a mega event, which in itself losing its relevance because of too much cricket. ICC should go back to the drawing rooms and seriously think.

  • dragqueen1 on February 19, 2011, 19:36 GMT

    Vinod they have scrapped the next CWC & replaced it with the 'Champions' Trophy, though cunningly they've kept they CWC title just to con(fuse) everyone, if you follow, wish i did. Just when the ICC can't get worse they manage it, they surely are the incompetent(i'm being polite here) sporting organisation in the world.

  • Vinod on February 19, 2011, 16:09 GMT

    Scrap the next edition of the World Cup... Why do we need a One-Day world cup ? I think it is time to move on towards a World Cup of a shorter version. Cricket is losing its charm because there is too much cricket played these days! Let's just have a T20 Cricket World Cup every 4 years.

  • cricket2011 on February 19, 2011, 10:36 GMT

    Very bad decission from ICC. instead of going to ahead ICC is going back. I don't know why every sports association enlarge the team numbers but cricket reducing. Its very cruel and very worst decision. Srilanka and Bangladesh and other some teams were associatives very year before. But they forgot every thing..... They don't make any voice against this decision....................

    Please change the title to world cup into ICC cup only

  • Magician11 on February 19, 2011, 10:34 GMT

    Good move. but ICC should create more opportunity for associate nation to compete against bigger teams.

    World cup is prized event and if you look at football only 15% of the top team plays the world cup football. the world cup should remain a event to look forward too and with associate teams the charm is lost in initial round.

  • shivsenas on February 19, 2011, 6:29 GMT

    just by reducing the number of teams the ICC thinks that one-day cricket will survive?? Is this progress or regress??? I cant understand what they want to prove by this? Will the next world-cup start straight from the Quarter finals?

  • MrArmchairCricket on February 19, 2011, 6:20 GMT

    Let's try and make some noise http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/pages/Keep-Associate-Nations-in-the-Cricket-World-Cup/126768010729777 ..

  • MrArmchairCricket on February 19, 2011, 6:17 GMT

    Camoflague... thats a bloody good idea... your way wouldn't rake in the advertising, like the IPL ads during the action though... the coin toss alone is bad.... the ICC will have ads for the coin revolutions

  • calvin_n on February 19, 2011, 5:57 GMT

    India has been known to be supportive to the cause of associate nations...I would advise them to approach BCCI and drum up the support.

  • D.V.C. on February 19, 2011, 4:58 GMT

    It's an extremely short sighted decision. Lorgat even admits that T20 is less skills based. If the Associates aren't playing longer cricket they won't develop their skills and will never be ready to make the next step. Without a World Cup to aim for, where is the incentive to play longer cricket for them? This decision dooms the future expansion of the game.

  • camouflage on February 19, 2011, 2:16 GMT

    ICC, just let 2 teams play. One Australia, because they always win, and decide another team by picking lottery..... Genius!

  • slugworth on February 19, 2011, 2:09 GMT

    Problem solved: One of the biggest concerns is the tournements length. The simple thing to do is play two games on the same day. But that means the games will over lap each other. Ok this is how you solve the problem reduce the game down to 40 overs. (80 in total) total time 4.5 hours. start one game at stadium A at 10 am - 3 pm. then start another game in another pool at stadium B at 4 pm - 9 pm. . So instead of one game per day, you could do 2 a day. practicurly reduce the time of the tournment by half. instead of 6 weeks you could very easily do it in a month.

  • KP_84 on February 18, 2011, 23:26 GMT

    I completely agree with Graeme Swann. How can we call it a World Cup if there are no qualifiers? Every nation that plays the sport internationally has to be given the opportunity to: i) qualify for; and ii) play in; the tournament. I hope they at least make the ninth and tenth ranked nations (probably Zimbabwe and Bangladesh - who aren't that much better than the Associates, any way) play off against the top Associates in WC qualifiers. Otherwise, the 50-over "World Cup" will become just another Champions' Trophy.

  • MasroorAhmed on February 18, 2011, 22:19 GMT

    ICC should consider the WC 2015 format on Gold and silver leagues. Top 8 teams based on ICC ODI ranking (July 2014) should participate on Gold plate single league and rest 2 bottom teams alongwith 6 associates contest in Silver plate same on single league format. The two finalists of silver plate alongwith 6 Gold plate league contest in WC Quarter Finals. This idea is to eliminate one sided boring games and provide good cricket as well as more opportunities to the associates. My two cents worth idea.

  • Caveman. on February 18, 2011, 20:27 GMT

    Yeah a cricinfo poll on this is badly needed. Please have two polls - one for the general public and the other for your experts. May be they will make ICC see some sense.

  • NikSaid on February 18, 2011, 19:40 GMT

    Agreed with ICC, T20 is the BEST way to promote associates. ICC should make it mandatory for associates to broadcast Live worldcups(odi and t20) FREE. Invite them for warm ups during the odi world cup. that way they get to experience an ODI world cup, motivate ALL teams to be in top 10. Long term picture looks promising.

    No need to have month long world cup to promote associate. T20 Cricket is best Cricket 101.

  • BC_LARA on February 18, 2011, 19:30 GMT

    Its just ridiculous..ICC is concentrating so much on the financial aspect that its missing the big picture.Smaller teams must get a chance to be noticed.It is ok if some matches are boring.Learn from soccer.If India and Pakistan cant get past the "minnows" ,kicking the new teams out of the world cup is not the solution. T20 is not the same as world cup.It is not as prestigious as world cup."Development of game world wide"- it has become a big joke for these guys.Im from India .I live in US.Most people dont even notice the game here.Dont tell me it is the american way.Popularity of soccer is increasing rapidly.Speaking for the fans world wide it is a sad decision. I think its a step backward from ICC

  • Dhushan on February 18, 2011, 19:07 GMT

    I maybe wrong but I won't be surprised if this decision is also to satisfy BCCI. As the ICC said before, the 2011 World Cup format is in favour of the top teams because India & Pakistan crashed out last time & there were huge losses financially but look at the strides CRICKET made. Isn't this why we're doing this? For cricket & not to fill cricket boards & their administrators with money? Let the other nations play & make it more competitive

  • dragoman on February 18, 2011, 19:06 GMT

    "WhatMustTheICCThink" sums it up best. And Swann's succinct "why would you want to take the world out of the World Cup?" comment is also spot on. It smacks of greed and selfishness on the part of the bigger nations who control the whole shebang. The problem is clearly with the format, not the number of teams. Now let's sit back and watch this Cup and see if Ireland or Kenya or Canada - or perhaps the most likely candidate, the Netehrlands -cause an upset. They will certainly be highly motivated to do so now! Then we can all laugh at the ICC as they try to remove the egg from their faces...

  • eatsometofu on February 18, 2011, 18:24 GMT

    the only thing world t20 is going to develop among the associates is how to slog the ball. that way, the associates will never develop the skills to compete with the full members and will forever be relegated into mediocrity. hence, the associates should forgo their dreams of ever becoming a test nation because the elites at the top don't want anyone else to join their country club.

  • Pits76 on February 18, 2011, 16:57 GMT

    to keep anyone out of the world cup is indeed unacceptable. there is no reason other than economic to justify that move and thats clearly not "legal" or "moral".

    as for the development of the game and the associates, i think ICC should recommend each major country to have a A team. These A teams which consist of players close to national selection can then play associates and other A teams. This would help the players improve, expose them to different conditions, and help promote and develop game in associate countries.

  • crussher on February 18, 2011, 16:54 GMT

    Yes, Cricinfo should call a poll on this. The ICC did before, of course, but took it down from their website after only a few hours when they found that there was overwhelming majority for a 16 team world cup.

  • eire on February 18, 2011, 16:51 GMT

    an absolute disgrace....greed ruins sport, look at canadas close match wid england and irelands 2 warm-up games,assoc teams r beginning to compete and those brains at the icc jus decide to remove them frm the tourney...it is not the number of teams that is the problem but the format...2015 wil be jus 2 games shorter,tlk about hypocricy,thy do not have brains at the ICC....Look at afghanistans story,it was nrly the grtest story in any aporting code lst yr n the ICC then decide to remove their drm....I for one am sick of watching 4months of aus versus england,SPREAD THE GAME or at least try and encourage to do so

  • dishumi on February 18, 2011, 16:36 GMT

    Wouldn't it be a good idea for CRICINFO to call a poll on this issue. I think it should be the FANS who decide if they want 10 teams or 14 teams at the World Cup 2015 and NOT the ICC !!!

  • Nickherts on February 18, 2011, 16:28 GMT

    12 teams gives the right balance. The current tournament would be so much better if it were 2 groups of 6 with the top 3 from each group carrying through points gained against each other and then playing the top 3 from the other group in a super six with semi finals to follow. Effectively all the big teams end up playing each other and all the group games mean something because only the top 3 qualify and points gained against fellow qualifiers are crucial. Its also a shorter tournament by two or three days and the strongest associates stay in.

  • NewYorkCricket on February 18, 2011, 16:23 GMT

    World Cup's first priority is to provide the best for its most loyal fans, for which they have to make every game interesting to the extent possible. Promoting the game is a secondary objective. 10 teams will make it competitive. Please take out the associate teams from the 50-over world cup. They can play in the t20 world instead.

  • chuck11 on February 18, 2011, 16:11 GMT

    This is totally ridiculous. It is about money... The games that involve the minnows does not spin as much money as the big boys, so it is the best thing to do in a business point of view. However, for the development of the game and the cricketing countries, the associates needs to be involved in the world cup. After all it is called the world cup for a reason!!

  • PeterJeavons on February 18, 2011, 15:54 GMT

    The problem with the World Cup is not the number of teams taking part in it, it's the bloated fixture list. The ICC made a mess of tackling this after the last tournament, by dropping two teams but introducing the overlarge groups of seven we now have, meaning that the number of fixtures has hardly changed. What's the betting that the new format will start with all ten teams playing each other in the group stage?

  • rayfanatics on February 18, 2011, 15:41 GMT

    Actually this is a good move considering 50 over cricket with minnows is just a record-making spree. Those who are endorsing for the inclusion of weaker teams, what progress have they made at the 50 over level from the past decade. Think for the greater good of the game. T20 with its shorter format not only spreads the game's popularity, has an incredible probability of an upset and in return some day you are going to get a FIFA style cricket world cup.

    Outside the world cup realm, the 2nd tier teams have to continuously play among themselves, and have an occasional short series with the big boys. Going on those results, the 50 over world cup can then be expanded.

    And the biggest reason is , with 10 teams, there is an exciting prospect of going back to the best World cup format ever : The 92 everybody plays everybody arrangement.

  • WhatMustTheICCThink on February 18, 2011, 14:56 GMT

    The ICC's decision to limit participation next World Cup flies in the face of overwhelming public opinion, will kill cricket's development worldwide, and combined with other administrative blunders, will kill the 50-over World Cup. The decision is purely one of financial greed, to ensure maximum dividends for the big buffalo.

    Without participation, Associates lose their matches, funding, sponsors, fans, reasons for missing work to play cricket, and best players to other countries.

    An increase in T20 WC participation is right, but without 50-over cricket, Associates will never develop players capable of competing at the top. Anyone who has played T20 cricket at club level knows that half the team never get a bat, only a handful bowl and youngsters, as talented as they may be, don't have the power to compete with adults, so miss out.

    You can't develop quality players in 4 balls and 4 overs. There'd never be a Dravid, a Vaughan, a Kallis, or even a Bevan if all we had was Twenty20.

  • slcrickcrazyfan on February 18, 2011, 13:49 GMT

    I totally agree with the opinion of swann, tait, de villiars abt limiting teams to 10...at least make it 12, so other teams can keep up with things and can improve skills along with their T20 experience they can prove that they can compete with bigger teams like Zim, ban, & even better teams likeSA, AUS, IND, PAK, SL....if T20's are meant 4 an upset, why not in 50 overs....KEN, even IRISH have shown what they can do...so y not give them a chance...Remember last 3 teams who have got the test status came emerged bcoz they were allowed 2 participate....!!! Come on all test playing captains.....convince that it is essential 2 keep giving @least 2 slots more(that would make it 12) to make other teams/countries interested abt the game....!!!

  • NALINWIJ on February 18, 2011, 13:12 GMT

    As an absolute minimum it should be 12 teams in 2 groups of 6 which is 30 games played in 5 rounds. if each round is played in 4days that is 20 days. Beginning on a thursday preliminary rounds finish on Wednesday. Quarterfinals on the weekend, Semifinal mid week and the final on saturday means the world cup can be done in 31 days. So there is no reason to exclude the associate and take the world out of world cup. We could even have a two week tournament involving top 8 the associates immediately prior to the world cup with the top 2 going to the cup and their final match played prior to the opening ceremony. The T20 tournaments are of little use to the development of cricket.

  • yohanse on February 18, 2011, 12:45 GMT

    this is nonsese. how does the ICC expect to improve the standards of cricket if associates only play gainst other associates and the test nations only play among themselves? they need to take a page out of FIFA's book and include more associate teams in the ODI world cup and they also need to start organizing occasional friendlies between test nations and associates. if this is done then in the future the standards of cricket, especially in the lesser exposed territories will be much improved and maybe the sport will become as big as, or ever bigger than football(soccer).

  • TharinduChat on February 18, 2011, 12:25 GMT

    That's a good decision, but it would be better if there is a qualifying tournament for the last two slots involving Bangladesh and other associates.

  • WildAmigo on February 18, 2011, 11:58 GMT

    This will dent hopes of Afghanistan they came so far but it will not come good. Pity ICC makes cricket matters worsen..Cricket will become a league game sooner like football.

  • nevillem on February 18, 2011, 11:54 GMT

    I agree with the ICC position to limite the next 50-over World Cup to 10 teams. It remains however to be seen whether these 10 will all be the full members. This is where the newly-proposed ODI league will add value and context. To fully develop the game, and make every World Cup match count, the ODI league should allow for the Associates to play games against the full members over the next 4 year period. Only then, will the top 10 who emerge be worthy participants in the 'finals' process in 2015. Much like the FIFA Soccer World Cup, the ODI league would then render the actual World Cup as the culmination of a four-year process and not a random lottery. The format of the 2015 event should heed the very successful format used in 1992, when Australia and NZ last co-hosted the event. A round-robin league stage, involving 10 teams (thus 9 matches per team) would be the fairest format. The top 4 then qualify for the knock-out stages. Such a format would allow the WC to finish in 6wks

  • eshwarmv on February 18, 2011, 11:34 GMT

    Avoiding the associate teams is scandalous. This particular format is easily the best format. It satisfies both the associate nations as they get to play 6 games minimum. At then same time, the top teams have the maximum chance to qualify for the knockout stages. The only downside is that, on most of the days there is only ONE MATCH on that particular. Two matches per day in the first round must be staged. This will make the WC more interesting.

  • Taz786 on February 18, 2011, 11:28 GMT

    Ok there are a lot of one sided pointless games between the associate teams and top 10, but there always seem's to be a shock. Look at Kenya in 2003 World Cup for example.

    I have a feeling the Aussies/Kiwi's want to revert to the format they used in the 1992 World Cup, where everyone played each other in one big group of 9 I think it was at the time and the top 4 went through to the Semi's. If that is the case then 10 will be more than enough teams, although I do feel for the Associate teams missing out.

    Another example of how money is dominating against actually being able to spread the game globally.

  • slugworth on February 18, 2011, 11:08 GMT

    Associates Involvement. The cons: lop sided matches, makes the tournement to long, test team gets knocked out. (by minow). The pros: It is a "world" cup, up sets over test teams, new teams (afghanstan). progess, development, improvement. its the right thing to do. spreads cricket.

    Changes that are needed: reduce games down to 40 overs, with split innings. this deals with the length of game (and overall length of tournement). reduces the chances of extreme of a lopsided games, a shorter game creates a more level playing field and also makes "more" matches competitive. also a split inings can introduce a bonus point to 1st innings lead. it also gives both teams to play on the same pitch conditions and wheather patterns.

  • abbas_siraj on February 18, 2011, 11:02 GMT

    Well i totally disagree with the decision as if these low rank teams will not play at the top level competition how will they improve their game. Remember the Sri Lanka side in the 1992 world cup they were also among the lower rank sides during that time, but look at them now how they have improved. abbas siraj

  • Sanyaal on February 18, 2011, 10:54 GMT

    The ICC needs to reconsider their decision of not adding the associate teams in WC 2015. The addition of the associate teams in T20 doesn't make much sense. T20 is not all about skilled cricket, its Luck, hard hitting and some quick action. If the teams get accustomed to the T20 cricket they are sure going to suffer in the 50 over format. The game of cricket improves the longer you play and keeping the teams away from 50 over games against quality teams will not allow associates to improve. I think the best way to develop associate teams is by allowing them to play 50 over games and keeping them away from T20 until they match the required T20 intensity.

  • interkiwiwebdevelopers on February 18, 2011, 10:49 GMT

    Also, in the end, it should be about the love of the game, not about the $$$$. It's a tremendous feeling to walk out to the middle and get runs for your team, get wickets, take catches, dive to save boundaries, and get together at the end of the game and chamiserate and share the comraderie. Thats what I play cricket for, it makes me feel happy to be a part of the greatest sport on the planet :).

  • interkiwiwebdevelopers on February 18, 2011, 10:45 GMT

    Also, the ICC are spending hundreds and millions of $$$ trying to promote the game and help the associates be the best they can be. Although this is good and all, what is the point if they are shut out from playing against the best teams in the world and using the experience to continue making positive stides. It is not just about Twenty20 cricket, although that format is highly marketable in the USA and Canada. ODI's are still a core part of Associate cricket and as with most countries, Test cricket remains the pinnacle of professional cricket and is the dream of these countries to play. You have Ireland being so close to achieving Test status, and just as the door is being opened, Haroon Lorgat grabs the handle and slams it shut. It shouldn't matter if Bermuda gets walloped by the likes of India, or Canada crumble against NZ, if Associate countries like these are given the chances they will definitely improve and there wont be so many one sided games.

  • Marto_TheLegend on February 18, 2011, 10:38 GMT

    Utterly ridiculous. If the Associate nations play only T20, it will further widen the skill gap between the test nations and the rest. Is the ICC really so damn ignorant not to realize this?!

  • theswami on February 18, 2011, 10:35 GMT

    "Why would you want to take the world out of the World Cup?" Zigackly Ferpectly right ....

  • SagirParkar on February 18, 2011, 10:30 GMT

    I have long felt that the game needs a wider base of teams playing at the top level and that a sort of matchmaking ought to be in place so that we do not have mismatches of sorts, especially at a marquee event such as the World Cup. Based on Mr Lorgat's words, it is evident that the 50-over format might not be the ICC'spreferred short version that is played globally and it does make sense if the ICC is to globalise the sport and compete in the American market. Giving Associate members more exposure in the T20 format and the T20 WC makes more sense therefore. We all have seen what a bloated event the 2007 tournament was with many matches that did not even generate interest. Yes there were a few hiccups for the 'big' teams but these things happen. There is a case for more exposure for the associate teams but is the ODI World Cup the place for that, especially considering that it is a once-in-4-years event ? Perhaps more matches/FTP for them might be better option for them.

  • worldofcricketforums on February 18, 2011, 10:26 GMT

    The associate teams do have a point, but lets look at this world cup, where to be fair, the first month of cricket is going to be pretty pointless. The associates will have a far better chance in the T20 WC and I agree with the ICC (for once) that the T20 format is the best to go for to begin with.

  • fanacric on February 18, 2011, 10:24 GMT

    This is really a ridiculous decision ...........it's not fair, ICC is going to make the world cup something like a club for rich people only where others are not wanted! Then how can you term it as a WORLD CUP when you do not let others from the same world to participate in?! ICC should let at least two best associate teams to participate in! We talk more often about the globalisation of cricket but the real scenario is completely opposite!

  • deepakniit on February 18, 2011, 10:24 GMT

    if only top ten teams will play the world cup.so what will be difference in champions trophy and cricket world cup?

  • megaphoniumfanfare on February 18, 2011, 10:05 GMT

    I'm with Mr Sears 100%. Taking out the Associate teams from their most important forum for development is an outrage. The difficulty is that no-one can really find a format that works. The Super 6/8 was criticised for being too complex, and we all know what was wrong with 07. Now for this World Cup its gone back to Quarter Finals which marginalises the entire month long group stage so much, as you only have to beat minnows to qualify. May aswell just have a 16 team knockout tournament in that case.

    I think, considering the World Cup has a stigma of being slightly uncompetitive, and because there are only 4 or 5 consistently top quality countries, they should keep the current format but just have the top 2 in each group go straight to the Semis. Imagine how competitive it would be, watching top level Cricket teams like Aus-Eng-SL-Pak fighting with each other just to stay alive.

  • eddsnake on February 18, 2011, 9:56 GMT

    Well said Tom Sears, if only the CEOs of Ireland, Holland and Canada were kicking up a similar fuss. If any of the Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe or Bangladesh (all former associates) Chief Executives supported the 10 team World Cup proposal then they have given a new definition of the word hypocrisy!

  • andrew.henshaw on February 18, 2011, 9:56 GMT

    Absolutely pathetic. I hope Ireland make Haroon Lorgat eat his words. T20 is no consolation for the loss of World Cup places. It really is all about money, otherwise the 2015 would be shorter (given 4 less teams involved).

  • yorkslanka on February 18, 2011, 9:53 GMT

    this is a very poor decision and is probably governed by money, considering its the ICC..this stops emerging nations developing their 50 over cricket and should be overturned asap...

  • Lushantra on February 18, 2011, 9:27 GMT

    it's totally crab ........ I hope if one other that top10 reaches the semi's then answer will be obvious.

  • porter54 on February 18, 2011, 9:19 GMT

    When are they going to listen? There would be no hope for any associate becoming a test nation, how could they possibly prove that moderate success at T20 level will lead to success in ODI's or tests? The best thing about the World Cup is watching sides that you only get the chance to see once every 4 years and the upsets that follow, who cares if some sides get smashed, sometimes T20's are worse (EG: Kenya v NZ in 2007). Would've been great to see the warmups to see Ireland v New Zealand & Zimbabwe, Canada v England, Netherlands v Kenya. All looked like great games. I live in Aus and was pumped for the next world cup, I would've travelled around to watch the Irish. If they dump the associates, I won't bother going to a game.

  • ahamedirshad123 on February 18, 2011, 9:05 GMT

    CEO does not want the game to grow.If any one of the weaker teams makes final next world cup,will icc let them to play test?

  • Timmuh on February 18, 2011, 9:03 GMT

    Pathetic. The ICC, and the wealthier nations, shoulkd be doing much more to enhance the game in Associate nations. T20 isn't a vehicle to drive the game, its not even cricket but a completely different game that shares some of the same equipment and rules. If the Associates are going to be cut out of the World Cup, the ICC better do something huge to compensate. Much, much bigger than anything that has been done before.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Timmuh on February 18, 2011, 9:03 GMT

    Pathetic. The ICC, and the wealthier nations, shoulkd be doing much more to enhance the game in Associate nations. T20 isn't a vehicle to drive the game, its not even cricket but a completely different game that shares some of the same equipment and rules. If the Associates are going to be cut out of the World Cup, the ICC better do something huge to compensate. Much, much bigger than anything that has been done before.

  • ahamedirshad123 on February 18, 2011, 9:05 GMT

    CEO does not want the game to grow.If any one of the weaker teams makes final next world cup,will icc let them to play test?

  • porter54 on February 18, 2011, 9:19 GMT

    When are they going to listen? There would be no hope for any associate becoming a test nation, how could they possibly prove that moderate success at T20 level will lead to success in ODI's or tests? The best thing about the World Cup is watching sides that you only get the chance to see once every 4 years and the upsets that follow, who cares if some sides get smashed, sometimes T20's are worse (EG: Kenya v NZ in 2007). Would've been great to see the warmups to see Ireland v New Zealand & Zimbabwe, Canada v England, Netherlands v Kenya. All looked like great games. I live in Aus and was pumped for the next world cup, I would've travelled around to watch the Irish. If they dump the associates, I won't bother going to a game.

  • Lushantra on February 18, 2011, 9:27 GMT

    it's totally crab ........ I hope if one other that top10 reaches the semi's then answer will be obvious.

  • yorkslanka on February 18, 2011, 9:53 GMT

    this is a very poor decision and is probably governed by money, considering its the ICC..this stops emerging nations developing their 50 over cricket and should be overturned asap...

  • andrew.henshaw on February 18, 2011, 9:56 GMT

    Absolutely pathetic. I hope Ireland make Haroon Lorgat eat his words. T20 is no consolation for the loss of World Cup places. It really is all about money, otherwise the 2015 would be shorter (given 4 less teams involved).

  • eddsnake on February 18, 2011, 9:56 GMT

    Well said Tom Sears, if only the CEOs of Ireland, Holland and Canada were kicking up a similar fuss. If any of the Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe or Bangladesh (all former associates) Chief Executives supported the 10 team World Cup proposal then they have given a new definition of the word hypocrisy!

  • megaphoniumfanfare on February 18, 2011, 10:05 GMT

    I'm with Mr Sears 100%. Taking out the Associate teams from their most important forum for development is an outrage. The difficulty is that no-one can really find a format that works. The Super 6/8 was criticised for being too complex, and we all know what was wrong with 07. Now for this World Cup its gone back to Quarter Finals which marginalises the entire month long group stage so much, as you only have to beat minnows to qualify. May aswell just have a 16 team knockout tournament in that case.

    I think, considering the World Cup has a stigma of being slightly uncompetitive, and because there are only 4 or 5 consistently top quality countries, they should keep the current format but just have the top 2 in each group go straight to the Semis. Imagine how competitive it would be, watching top level Cricket teams like Aus-Eng-SL-Pak fighting with each other just to stay alive.

  • deepakniit on February 18, 2011, 10:24 GMT

    if only top ten teams will play the world cup.so what will be difference in champions trophy and cricket world cup?

  • fanacric on February 18, 2011, 10:24 GMT

    This is really a ridiculous decision ...........it's not fair, ICC is going to make the world cup something like a club for rich people only where others are not wanted! Then how can you term it as a WORLD CUP when you do not let others from the same world to participate in?! ICC should let at least two best associate teams to participate in! We talk more often about the globalisation of cricket but the real scenario is completely opposite!