ICC news April 19, 2011

'Associates future must be decided in June'

225

Warren Deutrom, the chief executive of Cricket Ireland, believes that the right of Associate nations to compete at the 2015 World Cup will be established at the ICC's annual conference in Hong Kong at the end of June. His comments came after ICC president, Sharad Pawar, requested that the tournament's composition be reassessed in response to strong and widespread criticism of the decision to limit participation to the ten Test-playing nations.

Following two weeks of silence in the wake of the decision reached in Mumbai on April 4, the ICC confirmed in a press release on Tuesday that a reassessment was on the cards. "I have given this matter further serious thought and will request the board to consider this topic once more," Pawar said. "I can understand the views of the Associates and Affiliates and the ICC will seek to deal with this issue in the best way possible."

Deutrom interpreted the ICC's silence until now as a sign that they knew they could not justify their decision. "The lack of response in those two weeks probably meant they realised they were defending the indefensible," Deutrom told ESPNcricinfo. "The ICC management are a very careful and expert bunch, and they will have done their homework. I know a lot of people have been telling us over the two weeks how strong our position would be if external remedies were necessary, although we don't want to get to that stage, we want it to be the last resort.

"I think the issue would have to be resolved in June," he added. "If there was to be any fudge, it would be completely unacceptable unless the conclusion was that we need a qualifier but we don't know what that qualifier should be. If the principle was established that a qualification tournament was to be reinstated I don't think the Associates could have too much of an argument with that, and we wouldn't necessarily need to be involved in that ongoing discussion. Our argument is purely that there needs to be opportunity for the world to be involved in the World Cup."

Over the past few days, the Associate members had met and discussed among themselves how best to handle the decision; those discussions resulted in a letter being sent to the ICC.

"We've done a great deal of research over the last week, particularly Warren Deutrom of Ireland; we've had a lot of letters of support, we've also had some experienced sports lawyers contacting us offering us help," Richard Cox, chief executive of the Netherlands board, told ESPNcricinfo. "On that basis we felt we were at least able to contest the decision around qualification and the opportunity to qualify which is what we've done."

At its meeting on April 4, two days after the World Cup final, the ICC board decided to allow only the ten full members in the 2015 edition to be hosted in Australia and New Zealand. The board also agreed that the ten-team format would be in place for the 2019 World Cup in England as well, though there would be a qualification process involving the Associates.

Despite the encouraging signs of a rethink, Deutrom was determined not to lose sight of the bigger picture. "We are not regarding it as anything other than a short step in a longer journey," he added. "The fact it is back on the [ICC] board's agenda is a good thing, but it's still the same ten people having the same discussion on the same issue, so there clearly has to be a catalyst. We have to help them reach a different decision.

"Part of that process we would hope would be a face-to-face meeting, which is what we asked for in the letter we wrote to Sharad Pawar," Deutrom added. "That wasn't addressed in his response to us this morning, so we sincerely hope that it will be addressed in the coming days. We would seek a meeting with the president, vice-president and senior ICC management, so that everyone is fully aware of the depth of our resolve on this matter. All of our members are very much as one on this. They completely, unreservedly and wholly condemn the decision, and our elected representatives are mandated on behalf of the 95 non-Test nations to go ahead and seek redress with the ICC."

The recently concluded World Cup, which has been largely hailed as a success, featured 14 teams, and the league stage was played in two groups of seven each, with the top eight teams playing the quarter-finals. The proposal to trim the event meant that a team such as Ireland, which has had two successful World Cups, would not be a part of the next tournament. To compensate, the World Twenty20 was expanded to 16 teams, giving six Associate or Affiliate members a chance to play in a premier world event every two years, but no matter how well they perform there, they did not have a chance to make the cut for the 2015 50-over World Cup. Pawar's intervention could yet change that.

Andrew Miller is UK editor of ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • enigma77543 on April 22, 2011, 17:29 GMT

    Just to be clear,I'm NOT saying this 4-day event should be qualifier for WC but this is something ICC must do to strengthen & prepare top Associates (which'd include Ban & Zim as well after they're stripped off their Test-status) for Test-cricket in the years to come.Those Associates who're doing well, have at least some sort of a 4-day first-class structure, have reasonable public-interest in cricket & thus have the potential to become competitive Test-nations some years down the line can play against top domestic &/or A-teams of stronger nations; the event may include 3 top minnows & 3 domestic/A-teams, more wouldn't be financially feasible; it'd be nice 15-match annual event & Associate that does well consistently may be given a "temporary test-status" for a couple of years & of course, if they do well in that period & have the requisite depth of talent then they may be given full Test-status. As for NZ & WI, they're both comfortably way ahead of minnows in 4/5-day cricket.

  • Notredam on April 22, 2011, 8:49 GMT

    Well Enigma if u say that they need to play more 4 day games..then same shud apply for bang,,zimm and even windies ,, kiwis,,,but if u see proper test palyng ciuntries...

    India, Oz,Eng,Saf , Slank,,,,wud qualify ,,so 5 countries cnt play ..even football and rugby test has mismatches..i am not saying invoilve canada,,or namibia,,but ireland and dutch,,so 12 team getting top order cricket wud be best solutu\ion..and next 5 yrs try to get 2 more assoociates to top level table...

  • enigma77543 on April 21, 2011, 16:55 GMT

    I'm sure Ban & Zim are scared of losing to IRL,ND,etc as they'd like to pretend as "Test-nations" (they both need to be stripped off their Test-status) but where have I said that population should've anything to do with who gets to play & who doesn't? One thing that Ban are definitely ahead on compared to other minnows is the public-interest thus they've huge potential, especially because cricket is NOT a sport which can grow easily in countries having very little passion for cricket as it'll always seen by most of the world as a 7-8 hour-long "boring & tedious" sport. The only possible way, if at all, would be if minnows started winning regularly & that's not going to happen at the international level, hence, rather than getting them play against top teams, ICC should get them to play 4-day & 1-day games regularly against domestic & A-teams of stronger nations & please don't tell me, more matches = more improvement, if that were true then Ban & Zim wouldn't be so mediocre for so long

  • Notredam on April 21, 2011, 9:31 GMT

    Bangladesh are surely afraid of facing irish...even ducth wud push them off on seaming, bouncing tracks...have a match up of 10 mtch series..

    just becoz of 200 million pople supportes dsnt mean u get test status..

    on that order india shud every time win the world cup as there population is max in cricket world..

    also china should get automatic qualification in semis and brazil should also play..what a joke...

    If u r gud u deserve propmotion and reward irrespectiv of country populationm..

    infrastructure will only build once u get named faces in public and interest, govn backing,,,so bangadanhudesh didnt become in 1 year..all stadiums ready..similary wth lankanss..............so develop and se by next wrld cup..gve irish 15 odi against full memebers in1 year..i say sincerely they can win 3-4 out of those which wud be remarkable..acheivement..

  • enigma77543 on April 21, 2011, 9:19 GMT

    @Notredam - "Irish desevre test status for sure.. No 2 ways about it.." That's a joke, right? They couldn't even beat Ban & WI (its another matter that Ban & Zim don't deserve to be Test-nations either), not to mention Test-cricket is a completely different kettle of fish compared to ODIs & T20s, firstly, they must've a strong domestic-structure to just be competitive in Tests. @Rakesh_Sharma - "ICC must pass a rule that minimum two WC league matches must be played per day with no off days during league stage. So this unreasonable cries of WC being too long and cutting teams does not happen" Do you think time is the only issue? Do you know that organising every match entails certain costs & matches involving minnows can't even cover their expenses & often result in losses. May be you & your fellows here asking for more mediocre teams & more mediocre matches should contribute a few million so that ICC can cover the losses arising out of having more mediocrity at the international level.

  • Notredam on April 21, 2011, 5:15 GMT

    Ireland serve their country well and made them proud...in 2007 and 2011 world cups...So they surely deserve...Also dutch were gud enuf.. Scotland luk dsiciplined....So...these 3 desevrve surely...replace Zimmies..and bangandu

  • Rakesh_Sharma on April 21, 2011, 0:06 GMT

    ICC must pass a rule that minimum two WC league matches must be played per day with no off days during league stage. So this unreasonable cries of WC being too long and cutting teams does not happen. Why is ICC crying as if there is no solution for long tournament? Pass the rule/laws etc so no organizer can play pranks of longevity cries. Also there must be rule of format.Two teams of 6 each with round robin in each group.Top two from each play semifinals. Do not allow organizers to suggest the tournament format.What sort of WC is it if everytime there is different format? However one thing must be certain that NEVER A Quarter Finals for a wc where there are just 8 strong teams. ICC can think of QF again when there are twenty strong teams may be next century.

  • nikhildevdesai on April 20, 2011, 19:55 GMT

    12 teams is perfect WC followed by Super SIX which makes the teams work harder rather than knowing that eight teams will be going further. Include Zimbabwe, Ireland, Bangladesh, who are not so better than other associates. Last spot should be played by Afghanistan or Netherlands. Or have four teams play a qualifying round. These teams should be 9th ranked, 10th ranked, and two of the best associates like Ireland, Afgahnistan, Netherland, Kenya, etc.

  • Street_Hawk on April 20, 2011, 18:33 GMT

    10 team WC is definitely on the card...extension to 12 team may be considered but associate team qualities need to improve (I don't think Zimbabwe's performance good enough to be full member yet)... I have no doubt about the fact that there should be a qualifier for the last 2 spot among 10 teams...I don't like the idea of first 10 ranked teams playing in the WC..then why don't we just give the WC to #1 team without playing a single ball?

    Also, to improve associate team qualities they need to play with A teams from India, SL, Aus etc. on regular basis (both 1 day and 4 day matches)..I do see bright future for Ireland and Afghanistan if they are nurtured properly

  • Notredam on April 20, 2011, 18:04 GMT

    Irish desevre test status for sure..

    No 2 ways about it....

  • enigma77543 on April 22, 2011, 17:29 GMT

    Just to be clear,I'm NOT saying this 4-day event should be qualifier for WC but this is something ICC must do to strengthen & prepare top Associates (which'd include Ban & Zim as well after they're stripped off their Test-status) for Test-cricket in the years to come.Those Associates who're doing well, have at least some sort of a 4-day first-class structure, have reasonable public-interest in cricket & thus have the potential to become competitive Test-nations some years down the line can play against top domestic &/or A-teams of stronger nations; the event may include 3 top minnows & 3 domestic/A-teams, more wouldn't be financially feasible; it'd be nice 15-match annual event & Associate that does well consistently may be given a "temporary test-status" for a couple of years & of course, if they do well in that period & have the requisite depth of talent then they may be given full Test-status. As for NZ & WI, they're both comfortably way ahead of minnows in 4/5-day cricket.

  • Notredam on April 22, 2011, 8:49 GMT

    Well Enigma if u say that they need to play more 4 day games..then same shud apply for bang,,zimm and even windies ,, kiwis,,,but if u see proper test palyng ciuntries...

    India, Oz,Eng,Saf , Slank,,,,wud qualify ,,so 5 countries cnt play ..even football and rugby test has mismatches..i am not saying invoilve canada,,or namibia,,but ireland and dutch,,so 12 team getting top order cricket wud be best solutu\ion..and next 5 yrs try to get 2 more assoociates to top level table...

  • enigma77543 on April 21, 2011, 16:55 GMT

    I'm sure Ban & Zim are scared of losing to IRL,ND,etc as they'd like to pretend as "Test-nations" (they both need to be stripped off their Test-status) but where have I said that population should've anything to do with who gets to play & who doesn't? One thing that Ban are definitely ahead on compared to other minnows is the public-interest thus they've huge potential, especially because cricket is NOT a sport which can grow easily in countries having very little passion for cricket as it'll always seen by most of the world as a 7-8 hour-long "boring & tedious" sport. The only possible way, if at all, would be if minnows started winning regularly & that's not going to happen at the international level, hence, rather than getting them play against top teams, ICC should get them to play 4-day & 1-day games regularly against domestic & A-teams of stronger nations & please don't tell me, more matches = more improvement, if that were true then Ban & Zim wouldn't be so mediocre for so long

  • Notredam on April 21, 2011, 9:31 GMT

    Bangladesh are surely afraid of facing irish...even ducth wud push them off on seaming, bouncing tracks...have a match up of 10 mtch series..

    just becoz of 200 million pople supportes dsnt mean u get test status..

    on that order india shud every time win the world cup as there population is max in cricket world..

    also china should get automatic qualification in semis and brazil should also play..what a joke...

    If u r gud u deserve propmotion and reward irrespectiv of country populationm..

    infrastructure will only build once u get named faces in public and interest, govn backing,,,so bangadanhudesh didnt become in 1 year..all stadiums ready..similary wth lankanss..............so develop and se by next wrld cup..gve irish 15 odi against full memebers in1 year..i say sincerely they can win 3-4 out of those which wud be remarkable..acheivement..

  • enigma77543 on April 21, 2011, 9:19 GMT

    @Notredam - "Irish desevre test status for sure.. No 2 ways about it.." That's a joke, right? They couldn't even beat Ban & WI (its another matter that Ban & Zim don't deserve to be Test-nations either), not to mention Test-cricket is a completely different kettle of fish compared to ODIs & T20s, firstly, they must've a strong domestic-structure to just be competitive in Tests. @Rakesh_Sharma - "ICC must pass a rule that minimum two WC league matches must be played per day with no off days during league stage. So this unreasonable cries of WC being too long and cutting teams does not happen" Do you think time is the only issue? Do you know that organising every match entails certain costs & matches involving minnows can't even cover their expenses & often result in losses. May be you & your fellows here asking for more mediocre teams & more mediocre matches should contribute a few million so that ICC can cover the losses arising out of having more mediocrity at the international level.

  • Notredam on April 21, 2011, 5:15 GMT

    Ireland serve their country well and made them proud...in 2007 and 2011 world cups...So they surely deserve...Also dutch were gud enuf.. Scotland luk dsiciplined....So...these 3 desevrve surely...replace Zimmies..and bangandu

  • Rakesh_Sharma on April 21, 2011, 0:06 GMT

    ICC must pass a rule that minimum two WC league matches must be played per day with no off days during league stage. So this unreasonable cries of WC being too long and cutting teams does not happen. Why is ICC crying as if there is no solution for long tournament? Pass the rule/laws etc so no organizer can play pranks of longevity cries. Also there must be rule of format.Two teams of 6 each with round robin in each group.Top two from each play semifinals. Do not allow organizers to suggest the tournament format.What sort of WC is it if everytime there is different format? However one thing must be certain that NEVER A Quarter Finals for a wc where there are just 8 strong teams. ICC can think of QF again when there are twenty strong teams may be next century.

  • nikhildevdesai on April 20, 2011, 19:55 GMT

    12 teams is perfect WC followed by Super SIX which makes the teams work harder rather than knowing that eight teams will be going further. Include Zimbabwe, Ireland, Bangladesh, who are not so better than other associates. Last spot should be played by Afghanistan or Netherlands. Or have four teams play a qualifying round. These teams should be 9th ranked, 10th ranked, and two of the best associates like Ireland, Afgahnistan, Netherland, Kenya, etc.

  • Street_Hawk on April 20, 2011, 18:33 GMT

    10 team WC is definitely on the card...extension to 12 team may be considered but associate team qualities need to improve (I don't think Zimbabwe's performance good enough to be full member yet)... I have no doubt about the fact that there should be a qualifier for the last 2 spot among 10 teams...I don't like the idea of first 10 ranked teams playing in the WC..then why don't we just give the WC to #1 team without playing a single ball?

    Also, to improve associate team qualities they need to play with A teams from India, SL, Aus etc. on regular basis (both 1 day and 4 day matches)..I do see bright future for Ireland and Afghanistan if they are nurtured properly

  • Notredam on April 20, 2011, 18:04 GMT

    Irish desevre test status for sure..

    No 2 ways about it....

  • enigma77543 on April 20, 2011, 17:49 GMT

    Most people here talking about more teams & more matches to Associates have no clue about the financial & logistics side of things; I bet none of us work for free & in the same way, the sport needs money to survive & grow. I'm not saying that ICC is made up of saints, far from it, but new teams rely heavily on ICC for funding, the money which ICC earns through top teams producing exciting cricket, so just getting new teams to play in a 12-16-team WC does NOT help cricket to grow, in fact, by having so many mediocre teams renders the group stage almost pointless (even in WC2011, any one of us could've predicted beforehand who the quarterfinalists were going to be) which doesn't help bring in the crowds, TV-viewers or the sponsors which bring in the money to the sport by producing generally more exciting cricket. The way teams are placed today, in terms of their quality, I don't think there should be any more than 10 teams until some of the weaker teams catch up with the top teams.

  • on April 20, 2011, 17:02 GMT

    it is time that the ICC institute cricket world cup qualifiers in which all teams are zoned and play each other irrespective of test status. those who qualify would then compete at the cricket world cup. the current farce of the test playing nations being given a free reign into the tournament is insulting to the mantra of seeking to develop the game globally. let the teams play each other and who knows, the mighty and bravado talking Aussies may just find themselves kicked off their high horse or the west indies stay home at the expense of....Argentina. food for thought

  • Rahulbose on April 20, 2011, 16:23 GMT

    I feel sorry for the associates, this latest talk of reconsideration in June is just a stalling tactic by ICC. Even if they allow a qualifier it will be most likely be against the bottom two (Bang, Zim) who are minnows for all practical purposes. The only fair solution is to have the host nations and the defending champions qualify automatically, everyone else has to earn the right to play in the WC.

  • sameer422 on April 20, 2011, 16:17 GMT

    I think ICC must have a look one more time on the issue of12 teams .12 teams haveve minimum two matches per day. Everything finishes within in month.No Quarter finals. BEST 4 ( top 2 team from each group in SF) All matches becomes relevant.

    All the other relevent countries wil alsol compete to qualify...will show interest in the 50 over match...if not interest will swith to only 20/20 format.

  • Rakesh_Sharma on April 20, 2011, 14:49 GMT

    Cricket has a potential to make civilized societies. This is recognized even by UN( United nations). here we have ICC making it ten team. Reason too long. Kids tell it can be made short by having minimum two games per day. so the logic does not hold.

    Please watch http://www.australiancricketnews.com/cricket-videos/afghan-cricket-9-min

    12 teams so that atleast one enthusiastic Associate team make it.It adds color to the whole WC which otherwise is same like routine bilateral series with same players same team. My bet is on Ireland and a very colorful Afghanistan team.

  • on April 20, 2011, 13:40 GMT

    what about 10+2 teams for the world cup but

    the 2 qualified associates+2 non-qualified associates=4 associates teams play a lot more with the "A" team of the above Test Playing Nation.

    In that way, the associated members will not be battered the way they do and the test playing nations will have a lot more chance to play their bench players and the off-form players to get back in the line for the national team.

    WHAT DO YOU THINK, guys??????????

  • Notredam on April 20, 2011, 12:21 GMT

    Ire Vs Ban ( 5 Home 5 away) : result 6:4 in Irish favour at least. Ire Vs Win ( 5 Home 5 away) : result 4:6 in Irish favour at least. Ire Vs Zim ( 5 Home 5 away) : result 5:5 in Irish favour at least.

    So guys Irish surely deserve. And that wud be 2 teams best way.

    Holl Vs Ban ( 5 Home 5 away) : result 3:7 (cnt get more bad than this) Holl Vs Win ( 5 Home 5 away) : result 2:8 (cnt get more bad than this) Holl Vs Zim ( 5 Home 5 away) : result 3:7 (cnt get more bad than this)

    So holland also deserve.

    best format 12 teams for 50 over world cup. 16 teams for 20-20 world cup 8 teams for test championship.

    and please incerae associates games against full members to 15 in 1 year atleast. and no 20-20 world cup in 2 yrs. shgud be in 4 yrs time only...

  • Rakesh_Sharma on April 20, 2011, 11:12 GMT

    12 teams . HAve minimum two matches per day. Everything finishes within 30 days.No Quarter finals. BEst four ( top 2 from each group in SF) All matches becomes relevant.

  • GP23 on April 20, 2011, 10:28 GMT

    10 teams should be the limit. It is best to avoid some lopsided one-sided dead rubbers. However, associates should be given a chance, last 3 ranked test teams and top 3 associates should play a round robin qualifying tournament. Top 3 of qualifiers must play in the WC.

  • on April 20, 2011, 10:01 GMT

    i wd love seeing teams like ireland nd netherland fr sure who show some promise to beat a team at ne given day if ur not taking dem seriously.....i hope ICC's gonna hange dere view.....nd as i ve heard afghanistan is also coming up good....so hope teams with fighting promise will come up nd try there level to make a change in d nxt world cup....good luck to d associates.....

  • Danizo on April 20, 2011, 9:37 GMT

    @sAiyAnstAr

    The reason that the FIFA World Cup is shorter than the ICC World Cup is because soccer/football matches last 90 minutes. Cricket matches last double that for Twenty20, quadruple that for ODI.

  • hsingh2711 on April 20, 2011, 9:35 GMT

    I think there should be 12 teams in World cup.Australia,South Africa,India,Sri Lanka,England,Pakistan,New Zealand,West Indies,Bangladesh,Zimbabwe,Ireland and Netherlands.

  • Noyam on April 20, 2011, 9:33 GMT

    Good News Common Sense Prevailed. I think the Botton two from Test Playing Nations should be part of qualifiers.Let them also justify their status.This will generate interest and also improve the standard of qualifiers.

  • Morgsy on April 20, 2011, 9:24 GMT

    I must say I am pleasantly surprised by the ICCs decision to review their earlier decision to block Associates from the 2015 world cup. Personally I have no problem with the bottom two or three test sides playing against the top associates to see who get the final WC berths. What is annoying me though is continual statements claiming NZ is a weak one day side. They're not! They have endured perhaps the worst yr in their one day history and have plummeted down the rankings....but not that long ago they were ranked number 2 in the world and usually occupy a place in the top 4 or 5....oh and the small matter of 6 or 7 WC semi final appearances. The current kiwi side is full of proven performers and up and coming youngsters. Class is permanent, form is temporary temporary. Some people have very short memories...

  • IrishCricketisAWESOME on April 20, 2011, 9:17 GMT

    EVERYONE MUST PUSH ON AND MAKE ICC HAVE A 12 TEAM WORLD CUP THAT WAY ALL FULL MEMBERS PLUS IRELAND AND ANOTHER ACCOSIATE CAN QUALIFY

  • on April 20, 2011, 9:00 GMT

    The format has to change,the whole thing gets utterly tedious at times but Id like to see the hosts and holders ONLY qualify as of right. The other nations,test playing,associate and affiliate should have to qualify for an 8 nations world cup in which all of teams meet once followed by two semi-finals and a final. Such a tournament could be played in a month. The six qualifying places should be played for in six different qualifying tournaments the year before the world cup with five teams in each qualifying competition playing each other once in a group format with the winners going through.This would reduce the chances of freak weather eliminating the best teams but would also give emerging nations a chance. I haven't a lot of time for the Irish position which appears to be that they must qualify every year whatever the standard of Irish cricket. I believe the Irish should be given a chance to qualify on merit but to include them as a matter of course would simply demean the sport.

  • Notredam on April 20, 2011, 8:45 GMT

    Irish and holland look better than associates. Afghanistan, Kenya,Scotland,Canada look next level. Bit below are Uae,Usa, Png,Namibia,Hongkong. How we are gonnna get cricket in tese countires witout 50 over cricket. Come on ICC think.

  • on April 20, 2011, 8:15 GMT

    the bottom 4 teams should play a qualifier........

  • jashan83 on April 20, 2011, 8:03 GMT

    I think many people are ignorant of a World Cricket League where each and every cricket playing nation takes part. It was earlier coupled in a very good way with top nations qualifying for the world cup (Ire, Neth, Ken & Can) and nations getting ODI status (6 nations have ODI status:- Afg, Scot, Ire, Neth, Ken & Can). Presently ICC finished the meaning of WCL by keeping the World Cup just for Test Nations (Zim is also a Test Nation for knowledge of people). These ODI status nations and Associates for WC are decided through WC Qualifiers. A WCQ is scheduled for 2013 and 10 out of 12 teams already decided-Ire, Scot, Neth, Can, Ken, Afg, UAE, Nam, PNG & HK. The rest of the 2 teams will be decided in 2013 WCL Div 3. Ideally it should be a 12 or 15 nation WC. However if it is a 10 Nation WC, then the bottom 2 Test Nations (BD, Zim) should take part in a tournament with top 6 of 2013 WCQ (Who will also get ODI status) and top 2 teams should reach the World Cup of 10 Nations.

  • grg525 on April 20, 2011, 7:52 GMT

    Good news, the game needs to be developed across the globe. I can't help but thinking that it might have been a different situation if India had not won. Best for everyone if they just get a guaranteed berth straight into the semis and let everyone participate, then everybody's corporate objectives objectives are met.......

  • on April 20, 2011, 7:38 GMT

    I think a 12 team tornament is more than sufficient. Yes the top 4 ranked Associate nations should get their chance in the world cup next year with the rest in a qualification round to check the progress and skill level. And the others need should be competitive in 20/20 world cup held every two years again its all about getting a global audience for cricket in any form then as the domestic structure of the sport increases so will their funding.

  • Danizo on April 20, 2011, 7:27 GMT

    Why don't the ICC take a leaf out of FIFA's book. Let any nation who wants to enter the qualifiers, but only let the top 32 play the World Cup. A lot of people say that this would make for a lot of boring cricket over 5-6 months, but why not play it in a similar fashion to the Ryobi One-Day Cup. 2 innings of 20 overs each. That way they could play 1-2 matches a day on the same ground and they can play on grounds throughout the selected country. This would reduce the length of the tournament to 3-4 months. Again, a lot of people would say this is too long, but this is a WORLD tournament we are talking about. It should be a spectacle. And for those who say that countries like Ireland and the Netherlands should not be playing proper international cricket, IRELAND defeated ENGLAND (2011 CWC). THE NETHERLANDS defeated ENGLAND (2009 T20 CWC) AFGHANISTAN qualified (2009 T20 CWC) and Kenya got to the semi-finals (2003 CWC).

  • kaymay on April 20, 2011, 7:04 GMT

    I think where the ICC was coming from was to eliminate the no-brainer associate games which do not generate revenue and spectator interest. Having said that Ireland and Holland have proved that associates need the opportunity to play in the world cup. In the current proposed format with 10 teams a total of 45 group matches will be played followed by semifinals and finals. I propose that they should take 5 associate teams and draw 5 groups of 3 teams with one associate in each group. 2 teams advance to next round and they can be split into two groups of 5 teams. 3 teams from these groups will advance to a super six stage. this arrangement will lead to 44 group matches which is still 1 less than the current format. This way ICC can have the more meaningful matches that they want, associates get a chance to play, they play 2 matches if they win one they advance to next round and play more thus proving their worth. Lots of group stage matches gives chances for test teams to go to SF's.

  • sAiyAnstAr on April 20, 2011, 6:50 GMT

    Simple fix. Just like the football World Cup. Everyone, except for the host nation/s need to qualify. That way, if Zimbabwe (sorry to pick on you) lose their qualifiers against Ireland and other "Associate" countries, then they are out.

    The Football WC has way more teams, yet they seem to have a shorter tournament.

    4 groups of 4 teams and the top 2 of each group going through to the quarter finals. That means in essence you can have 16 teams, so there are more teams included, but have a tighter playing schedule. Have a 2-3 day gap between matches so there is a reserve day, and you can finish the group phase in 1-2 weeks, as opposed to 5 weeks. Then the final's go from there. Below is what I propose

    Week 1 Day 1 - 1 vs 2 and 3 vs 4 Day 4 - 1 vs 3 and 2 vs 4 Day 7 - 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3

    Day 10 - Quarter Final

    Day 13 - Semi Final

    Day 16 - Final

    Is 6 games in 16 days too much? If so, then have a 4 day gap and make the contest go for a little over 3 weeks. Simple?

  • stevedd on April 20, 2011, 6:47 GMT

    I bet you all give them to play 15 ODI's in a year against all top teams and then they can even give every team a run for their money, if they dont I will eat my own words!!! this is my personal views on this team!!!

  • on April 20, 2011, 6:43 GMT

    i can see some valid arguments; but the host nation and the holders must get automatic entry. you may think well that would be a foregone conclusion, but recent history tells you that's not necessarily true. the WI hosted the last tournament 4 years ago and were definitely near the bottom of the pile. bangladesh were hovering close to the bottom of the pile this time. in 1986 australia were the worst side in the world, by 1987 they were world champions and within two years were one of the top three test sides in the world. this sort of dramatic rise could also occur in reverse, holders of the world cup decline to also rans. i must admit i dont have a solution, but at the moment there couldnt be a viable global tournament without the inclusion of india. not because they're a great side but because of the revenue they bring to the game. i understand the plight of the associates, but they cant dictate what should be happening, however they shouldnt neceessarily be excluded either!

  • Notredam on April 20, 2011, 6:20 GMT

    Irelnad surely deserve. ODI status , every year 15 ODi againsit full members. and world cup entry for 2015,2019.

    12 teams. Including Holland and ireland and then semis wud be great for WC.

    Ireland would beat bangladesh Bangalbadu and zimmies surely on australian, fast bouncy pitches. And on spiin slow traks of lanka. Have a match up of 10 match.

    i would say Ireland wud beat bangllaaa 7-3. And against Zimbabwe i would say they would beat zimmies 7-3 Too.

    So surely irish are better, Regarding Holland i wud say against banlgaa at spin 5 mtch and fast seam pithces. so 10 matches Bangla would win 6-4. Zimmies will have 5-5 agaoinst dutch.

    so comeon guys holland are not too bad.

    So irish and ducth desevre a place.

  • Notredam on April 20, 2011, 6:13 GMT

    Irelnad surely deserve. ODI status , every year 15 ODi againsit full members. and world cup entry for 2015,2019.

    12 teams. Including Holland and ireland and then semis wud be great for WC.

  • BDHUNTER on April 20, 2011, 6:07 GMT

    I previously mentioned the step that ICC can follow, which increase the popularity of cricket. No of Team participate : 12 Clauses 1: Top 08 will directly qualify for WC. Clauses 2: All Others cricket playing nation should attend in ICC championship tournament and best 04 team will be picked for WC. Group and formats: Clauses 1: Total 54 match will be held. Clauses 2: Two groups should be formed each contains 06 team. Clauses 3: Top 02 from each groups will proceed to Next round. Clauses 4: Here 04 team will form in a group & play each other's once and top 02 team will qualify for Final and rest are competed for third places in WC .

    Remarks: So in this case no one can questioned about the contention of ICC as ICC associates nation should performed well to get prospect in WC by playing ICC championship & quality of cricket, popularity, competitiveness will enhance further.

  • sanath007 on April 20, 2011, 5:52 GMT

    ireland and other associates deserves a chance to at least play a qualifying tournament to qualify for the world cup. i'm sure in current form ireland can beat zimbabwe and would be equally good as bangladesh and even could give windies a scare

  • on April 20, 2011, 5:48 GMT

    It is great if cricket becomes a global sports.If we pay attention to the associate members composition, most players belong to other countries. Teams like Holland, UAE barely have local representation, which shows cricket is not popular to the local people. Cricket could not get progress till the locals not be involved. Those teams deserve most which have good portion of local people. I think team ICC rightly reduced the no. of teams in the world cup. ICC should conduct a tournament where bottom 2 playing nations along with Associates should participate. Amongst all these teams 4 must elevate for the world cup.

  • enigma77543 on April 20, 2011, 5:16 GMT

    First thing first, some people are way overrating the Irish team, they're NOT better than Zim, Ban or WI, for god's sake, they couldn't even beat Ban & WI in the WC, neither are they good enough to get Test-status (in fact, Ban & Zim need to be stripped off their Test-status) so stop going overboard with this. Secondly, why not have only the top 8 ranked teams in ODIs get automatic entry & have the next 4 compete in a quadrangular qualifier as part of the WC & have the top 2 qualifiers meet the top 8 in the main WC consisting of 10 teams, 5 in two groups with the top 2 teams going into semifinals. This'd cut all the boring, unnecessary matches that take place in 12-16 teams WC while the top associates can qualify to play WC through the quandrangular-qualifier which'll've only 6 matches in total with each of four teams playing 3 games. I don't blame ICC for cutting the no of teams because money is an important factor that keeps the sport alive & we don't need boring pointless matches.

  • on April 20, 2011, 5:13 GMT

    countries like ireland should be able to play..... or countries like Bangladesh, Kenya, Zimbabwe, WI, Canada should not be able to play...

  • chandau on April 20, 2011, 5:12 GMT

    What happened to the ICC ranking system? The acceptable solution would be to give the top 6 test nations automatic entry to WC. The last 4 test nations and the next 6 / 8 associates can play another tournament. Then the top 6 from that can from the balance for the WC, which will have 12 teams. It means if the lower ranking test sides are good enough they can get in to the WC and same applies to associates. At t he moment Zim, Bang, adn WI seem to be not much better than Ireland or Kenya or Dutch, blowing hot and cold every other day. Even NZ and Eng are not on par with the top 5 ODI sides. But the problem for ICC is money. A round robbin tournament with say 8 associates and 4 lowly test teams will not generate much interest or money. So the circus will go on and there will be some decision still not made in the best interest of the game :)

  • Yolk_Eater on April 20, 2011, 4:33 GMT

    i would rather say, make WI and zimbabwe play the qualifiers too, WE WANT IRELAND

  • timohyj on April 20, 2011, 4:28 GMT

    having the associates play T20 is bad. The ICC should have the goal of trying to get more of the associates to test status. Having the m play in the T20 world cup and not the 50 over world cup will make the countries look for T20 specialists not classical batsmen.

  • cricket2011 on April 20, 2011, 4:01 GMT

    IRELAND, ZIMBABWE, NEDERLANDS and AFGHANISTAN are ready to play TEST. So Please give them Test Status. Make cricket global game. More than 20 teams in Twenty20 cricket and at least 20 team in ODI world cup

  • Abid_AMANYAAR on April 20, 2011, 4:00 GMT

    Guys- you have forgotten Afghanistan here. Afghanistan has beaten Ireland many times. unluckily they could not make to the World Cup this time. Thanks to Ireland Cricket Board for their efforts to give associates another Chance. hope the associates get a chance to fight for the talent and hard work they do.

  • on April 20, 2011, 3:48 GMT

    ICC have to response to the Associates requests. If ICC wants cricket in the top sports, they have to rethink about limitation of the world cup 2015. There are some good teams such as Irlend, Afghanista, Scotland, UAE... and they have to be consider in the next world cup. Also I'm requesting ICC to give tournaments to Associates teams with full members. it will help them to build their teams on the proper way.

  • IMObserver on April 20, 2011, 3:34 GMT

    Well you can invite 16 teams and still get the job done in four weeks. Have no group games and only knock out games like in Wimbeldon where they invite 128 players. Knock out could consist of best of three games. First round, which can be finished in one week, will have 8 pairing and 24 games. Next round 8 teams will have four pairing and 12 games and could finished in 2nd week. Next round, semifinals, will have 4 teams and 6 games to play can be finished in third week. Finals three games can be played in fourth week. Total of 45 matches. With best of three some team rising by luck like in 2007 WC will be remote. A team which looses two games cannot really complain. To make the pairing more competetive pair the top ranked team with 9th, 2nd ranked team with 10 ranked etc. You could have unofficial practice week for team that do want it rather than for all.

  • on April 20, 2011, 3:30 GMT

    Ireland deserves to be in the World Cup. The way Zimbabwe and the West Indies are playing cricket, Ireland today are way ahead of them. By not allowing the associates to compete in the 2015 World Cup, ICC are in a way killing Irish cricket. By 2019, if they do get a chance to play in World Cup, the majority of the current players would have either hung up their boots or ply their trade in the county circuit or as in case of Eoin Morgan, play for England. Test teams are so busy among themselves that it would be a surprise if they play even a single ODI with the associates.Associates deserve to be in World Cup. If Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe can be granted with Test status after years of pathetic and shoddy displays, Irish are way better! TEST STATUS FOR IRELAND!

  • on April 20, 2011, 3:26 GMT

    Test cricket is entirely different from 50 over. In 50 over games certain shots played are not cricket shots but profitable. England did not play their best Test player. Please do not mix up cricket with Pijama Cricket.

  • rustom_deboo on April 20, 2011, 3:22 GMT

    i have always been of the opinion that as many teams should be there in a world cup, to be called a 'world' cup. my suggestion is, divide 15 teams into 3 groups, with the top 3 from each advancing to the next round, where each side will play 2 games each, from where 3 teams go through to the semis, and the 4th and 5th play a qualifier for the 4th s/f spot. this means a total of 42 games, and there will be no issues regarding a long group stage too. also, more teams will get the exposure they deserve.

  • Agapornis on April 20, 2011, 2:47 GMT

    The format is what needs to be re looked into. The problem with the 2007 format was that it did not allow a major power to recover but more importantly made for an extremely boring super 8. The problem with the 1996/2011 format is that quarterfinals are not suited for a sport which has only 7 great teams. It is best to have 3 groups of 5 teams each in the league stage wherein there will be 10 matches played within each group. The top two teams from each group can qualify for a super 6 without carry over of points. Here each team would play the 4 teams from the other two groups. This stage would have 12 high intensity matches. After this would be the knockout which could either be a semi-finals / qualifier eliminator type. In fact a team winning all 4 of its super six matches could be allowed to go directly into the final. This would make for an exciting tournament of 45/46 matches squeezed into 5 weeks with the last 2 weeks providing amazing display of top notch cricketing skills.

  • shalin194 on April 20, 2011, 2:27 GMT

    i find it funny how ireland had same record as zim even though they played in tougher group and performed much better still they chose zim and not ireland

  • smudgeon on April 20, 2011, 2:26 GMT

    MinusZero - there already is an associates ODI tournament featuring promotion/relegation: the World Cricket League. What I would like to see happen is the promotion/relegation system extended to include the full members. There are definitely member sides which would get (and deserve) a wake-up call if relegated to division 1!

  • Benkl on April 20, 2011, 1:45 GMT

    8 teams works best , 4 highest ranked through automatically rest have to play of versus the minnows.

  • MinusZero on April 20, 2011, 1:31 GMT

    They could have a promotion/relegation system. Why can't they have a separate Associate world cup?

  • IPSY on April 20, 2011, 1:26 GMT

    The 2011 World Cup showed that there was no distinct difference between the teams. Who were the minnows? Or, who were the giants? What we saw in this WC was a tournament in which any team could have beaten the other on any given day, which did happen rather frequently. And since this is a fact, how and why did they come up with the strange idea that only the ten test playing nations would play in the 2015 WC. fOR SURE THE TEST PLAYING NATIONS DID NOT SHOW ANY CONVINCING SUPERIORITY OVER THOSE COUNTRIES THAT DO NOT PLAY TEST CRICKET. The non test playing countries can only improve from here on. It is therefore unfair to leave out the non test playing countries in any of the future tournaments.

  • on April 20, 2011, 0:56 GMT

    only the top 5 teams in ODI should qualify for the World Cup automatically. Zim and BAN. makes should not play test because i am the fan and i won't not watch Zim or BAn playing Eng or Aus in a test match.

  • sonataca on April 20, 2011, 0:43 GMT

    Why have 12 or 14 teams?? The teams that are less experienced should be given a chance to play with the more experienced teams as well. And why have qualifying games? How many countries play cricket that we would be in need to have qualifying games played? I will still say, all countries that play cricket should be allowed to participate. It's as simple as that. It's very funny that ICC will meet in a country who play cricket but have never ever been on the World Cup, a.k.a HONG KONG. Then they got their headquarters up at UAE...a team which played only once in 96 World Cup! My whole point is to let every cricket playing nation play in the World Cup.

  • Ozcricketwriter on April 20, 2011, 0:43 GMT

    I said some time ago - do it like the Soccer World Cup. Have hosts and World Cup reigning champions be exempt but the rest have to qualify. Then it won't matter how many teams. Personally, I think that 12 is the right number, given that we have 9 (or sort of 10) test teams, as then we don't dilute the quality too much. In actual fact, had we simply switched the minnows so that we had 1 weak minnow in each group, it wouldn't have been an issue in 2011 either. Kenya and Canada were bad while Netherlands and Ireland were competitive. So switch one to the other group and then this wouldn't have even been an issue.

  • aalkafi on April 20, 2011, 0:34 GMT

    If ICC wants cricket to be a global sport then follow the foot steps of the biggest global sport - soccer. Let the current WC holder and the host nation(s) automatically qualify and the remaining go thru a 3 year qualifying process. This could be three 50 over home and away match (which could be part of regular tour program). This will ensure Australia field their best team while touring Ireland. In the process if Ireland or Afghanistan comes; lets say at the expense of Bangladesh (I am a Bangladeshi) nobody should have any problem with that. That is the only way to expand cricket and be fair. May be twenty years later China or USA will play the world cup!

  • shrtlg on April 20, 2011, 0:30 GMT

    I don't have a problem with the 10 test playing nations being in the world cup, I have a problem with the choice of the current 10 test playing nations.

  • ev2323 on April 19, 2011, 23:53 GMT

    I think we should have a 12 team competition with the 10 test/odi nations playing and then 2 spots for associates. The associates should play qualifing games over the proceeding 2 years. Kenya, Netherlands, Ireland, Canada should play, plus the country who wins the world league. They should play each other country home and away over the 2 year period with the top two teams qualifying. It would give them much more cricket with meaning and importance to it, which is what the ICC is looking for. As for the world cup itself. 2 pools of 6 play round robin. One of the problems with the world cup is that teams can cruise when they have already qualified for the finals. To make more games relevant have the two pool winners go straight through to the semis with the 2nd and 3rd teams from each to play each other - winners through to semis, then onto the final.

  • samedwards on April 19, 2011, 23:47 GMT

    @DanfromCA,nope,2007 was a failure not bacuse of Ind-pak going out,but coz of the long super 8 schedule & general lack of close matches in them.If we follow the 4*4 model with 4 q/fs,a team will have to win 5 out of 6 matches to win the wc,So,it will ahve to remain alert & play well throughut the tournament,not like eng who stuttered through the group stages & still were lucky enough to get to q/fs.

  • Cricket-Buff on April 19, 2011, 22:52 GMT

    I am not sure why it has to be 14 or 10 only. I agree that couple of the associate teams were not able to compete with the strong teams, in that case we could have 12 teams participating, why penalize the other 2 teams that did compete with the stronger teams? Irrespective of the number of teams (10 or 12) it has to be the best teams in that format of the game (not the permanent members). If Ireland is better than Zimbabwe, it should qualify not Zimbabwe.

  • on April 19, 2011, 21:52 GMT

    Watch out .. risk of a severe "common sense" incident has been reported in the locality of the ICC .......

    Remember thinking something stupid is not the same as doing it ..... go on you're almost there - do something sensible and involve the Associates in some way ....

  • on April 19, 2011, 21:47 GMT

    More than the world cup ,teams like kenya,zimbabwe,ireland,holland need a healthy cricketing culture(if we want to include them in the world cup)..kenya in 2003 was a pretty good side but see them now.there cricket has reached nowhere in last 7 years.same thing applies for ireland too..if nurtured well they have the potential to do well in the future..I guess A teams of major nations like india,australia can play against them in bilateral or triangular series.this way when the next world cup will come they will be match ready for bigger nations(atleast they will compete better).

  • ajm63 on April 19, 2011, 21:47 GMT

    The pressure must be maintained. The reason why the ICC previously hasn't wanted a qualifying competition is to ensure Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, who vote in the same bloc as India at ICC meetings are rewarded for their loyalty with the guarantee of a WC place. The 'Associates' will always have this uncertainty until the principle of one vote per member is established - in football, one of the world's weakest football teams, American Samoa, has the same voting rights on FIFA as Germany, one of the world's strongest.

  • on April 19, 2011, 21:46 GMT

    I would say no automatic qualification except to WC holders and the home nation. Everyone has to qualify in some way or other. This way the minor nations will get to host and play against the test nations and this will also be a part of evolving the game and expanding the great game of cricket. What better way to qualify than have WI, Pak, NZ etc.. turn up and have to actually put a decent team out on the field or maybe miss out on qualifying.

  • Meety on April 19, 2011, 21:45 GMT

    I don't care how many teams compete in the W/Cup, just as long as EVERY nation has the chance to qualify during a 4yr period. Take Afghans for an example - they came for Div 6 or 7, & almost qualified for this W/C (probably would of performed better then Zim, Can, & Kenya & level with Netherlands if given a go). PNG have climbed very strongly into WCL 2, & why can't they have another couple of years to qualify for WC 2015? The Champions Trophy still exists, so why can't it be useful (instead of a revenue raiser), pre-qualify say 4 Test nations, the next 2 highest ranked teams in ODIs can pre-qualify, leaving in theory the bottom 4 Test playing nations to play a qualifying series against the best of the rest. Certainly Ireland would be there, Afghan I think would be not far off, I think Scotland & Netherlands would be there. The event should occur in Aus, (host nation), JUST prior to the W/Cup. This keeps the clear pathways open for Associate development!!!

  • on April 19, 2011, 21:41 GMT

    A Ray of Hope for Nepal! Cheers!!

  • on April 19, 2011, 21:28 GMT

    Have the ODI matches over 2011-2015 fairly spread between the top 16 ranked ICC teams. Say each team plays each other 10 times , 5 at home and 5 at rivals home over 4 years, for ODI WC qualifications rankings. So each team plays 160 qualifying matches over 5 years. Then choose 10 teams in the ranking for the WC. That is fair. There can be other ODI matches but those should not count towards the WC ranking. This is the best. This will also negate one off wins by associates upsetting the applecart in a WC.

  • DanfromCA on April 19, 2011, 21:18 GMT

    To this post:

    Posted by stationmaster on (April 19 2011, 19:48 PM GMT) 16 team WC. Four groups of four. Top two to quarters. Simplest thing in the world.

    Thats what happened in the West Indies. A couple of teams that got lucky in the group stages kicked out India and Pakistan in the first round and the rest of the tournament was like soda without fizz.

  • DanfromCA on April 19, 2011, 21:15 GMT

    here is the solution: Have a qualification tournament for the associate, and the top two teams from that should move into the world cup event. Thus, for the rest who do not qualify, its pretty simple. If you cannot beat the lower ranked teams in the qualifier, then you dont deserve to be playing the best teams in the world in a world cup stage.

  • on April 19, 2011, 20:38 GMT

    Watch this space. ICC will announce there will be qualification for a 10 team WC. Qualification will be based on rankings then minor tweaks of the FTP and ranking system will ensure that the 10 full members qualify for the 2015 WC. Am I too cyncical? Or do I just know the ICC too well?

  • on April 19, 2011, 20:33 GMT

    Finally we have some sense coming into the world of cricket. The associate teams have play really well in this years wc and will only get better. They need the wc as a target as cricket needs new teams new talent etc.

  • Cric_Blaze on April 19, 2011, 20:26 GMT

    The last 2 teams on the ODI ranking will have to participate in the qualifying tournament with the associate nations. The teams that reach the finals of the qualifying tournament make the 9 & 10th teams of the world cup.

  • kriskini on April 19, 2011, 20:14 GMT

    There should be a big qualifying round before the world cup for 2 weeks. In this qualifying round all teams should participate. A total of 16 teams. Top 8 playing next 8. Each one a best of five. 8 winners will paly round robin and 4 going in to the semi finals and then a grand final whcih can be done in 4 weeks. Altogather 6 weeks.

  • espncric123 on April 19, 2011, 20:11 GMT

    I think ICC must allow associate nations to play in CWC. Only then they will get the exposure to competitive cricket. It also helps cricket to spread its popularity in these countries. ICC must understand this. CWC should not be seen only from financial point of view. ICCs main role is to spread the spirit of cricket. They can shorten the CWC schedule by arranging 2 matches - 1 involving associate nation and other involving a test playing nation. That way not only minnows get a chance to play and also schedule will also be shortened to meet the demands of the public. Hope Men who matter will take a right decision with cricket in mind rather than just money.

  • bharath74 on April 19, 2011, 20:09 GMT

    To popularize the game of cricket, we should give a chance to associate nations. Ireland played better cricket than Bangladesh. Afghanistan is the next exciting country that is embracing cricket. Please don't clip the wings of these associate nations.

  • stationmaster on April 19, 2011, 19:48 GMT

    16 team WC. Four groups of four. Top two to quarters. Simplest thing in the world.

  • Deewaanaa on April 19, 2011, 19:47 GMT

    I see many creative and doable options recommended by general public here. It's hard to believe ICC can't come up with one or take one of these and keep everyone happy. ICC doesn't need to just satisfy Indian and Australian boards, it has a committment towards other nations as well. There is a reason we call it a "WORLD CUP"!

  • on April 19, 2011, 19:47 GMT

    Why can't they follow a mixed format? The top 32 teams compete in a knock out T-20 style tournament in 8 different leagues. Then the 16 will have a knockout ODI tournament. Then the semis and the finals can either be a test or ODI. This way more teams will be part of the WC and the strong teams can be at an advantage.

  • Rakesh_Sharma on April 19, 2011, 19:31 GMT

    ICC says WC is too long due to associates. My 6 year oold nephew told me that if 2 or 3 games are played per day ,the 50 55 match WC can be finished in less than 25 days. If one match played per day 55 match wc will take 2 months with break of one day between semifinals.

    May be ICC can employ my nephew as consultant so that they learn how to shorten the time. Ha Ha Ha.

  • Farhad-Shamsi on April 19, 2011, 19:26 GMT

    Good decision by ICC to reconsider the original decision. The more teams participate, the better will it be for Cricket at large. Have 15 teams participate in 3 Groups. Top 2 teams from each group go to SUPER SIX round. That way there will be a good fight amongst the top 8. There should also be 2 to 3 matches every day during the round-robin phase as in FIFA WC. That way WC can be over in 25-30 days.

  • Coastaltown on April 19, 2011, 18:31 GMT

    16 team WC. Four groups of four. Top two to quarters. Simplest thing in the world. Won't ever happen.

  • on April 19, 2011, 18:04 GMT

    @Anil_vsk and @ Rajesh, if with the Associates matches are boring then don't watch those matches for God shake but don't say that they should be Axed from the World Cup, When India started Playing cricket he was also a Weaker Team and it takes time to compete with the Stronger Teams.:)

  • on April 19, 2011, 17:50 GMT

    I think the right decision could be to have 10 top teams in the ODI ranking to compete rather than just 10 teams. that would be a fair evaluation.

  • bala-chala on April 19, 2011, 17:50 GMT

    I sincerely hope that this is the start of the end for the ICC and time for the birth of a new global cricket council.

  • on April 19, 2011, 17:46 GMT

    Commons Sense finally prevailing. It would be so tough for the associates if the WC had to be curtailed to 10 teams alone. Why ICC has been yelling in the name of spreading the game all over the world then?

    A common solution could be this. Select the top 8 teams based on the ICC ranking and then let the last teams including the 4 associates play the Qualifier just before the world cup. This can happen simultaneously with the warm up games. Out of these 6 teams select only the 2 finalists or may be 4 teams depending upon whether 12 or 14 teams need to be there in the world cup.

    I believe a 12 team format is good giving chances to most deserving nations. If IPL can last for 2 months why cant a world event last for a month and half?

  • Charindra on April 19, 2011, 17:44 GMT

    Ok, two options here. 1) A 10 team world cup with qualifiers for the last 3 spots OR 2) A 12 nation world cup. I'm cool with either. Finally, looks like sanity will prevail.

  • LORD-KHATRI on April 19, 2011, 17:41 GMT

    If ICC sticks with the decision, then there is a credible alternative : It should a 11 team tournament. the 11th Team being ICC Associates XI.

  • on April 19, 2011, 17:32 GMT

    I Sugesst Two Options to ICC for the World Cup 2015 .. 1st Option Regain Ten Teams for the Tournament and had Same format like World Cup 1992 Or 2nd Option is had 12 teams event and instead of Quarter Finals top 8 teams Divided in two two more groups similar format like World T20 .. which is the best possible option i suggest to the ICC hope they introuduce this Format for first time in 50 Over World Cup history ..

  • StevieS on April 19, 2011, 17:32 GMT

    Top 8 teams and a pre world cup to decide the last 2 spots, then we will see that Ireland is only a fluke team.

  • on April 19, 2011, 17:26 GMT

    if ICC wants to promote cricket they should aloud at least 14 teams in the world cup othervoise it will not be world cup it will be ten teams or tornament it could not be call a world cup just as a cricket lover on behalf of those lovers of cricket in afghanistan strongly disagred with the ICC dessation they are going to distory the sports of cricket from the world sepecialy from afghanistan this is the 1st sport in afghanistan which in very short time achive allot of success and afghan nation want to see afghan cricket team in the world cup but if we our team did not play in the nex world cup our goverment will also not sapport the sport of cricket in afghanista due to our political and other problems, soo ICC should re think about there dicition othervoise i am 100% sure our youth will stop playing cricket.. thanks

  • Vinod on April 19, 2011, 17:25 GMT

    Finally some common sense..however we still have to wait till June to see what will actually happen. ICC should get rid of this Full Member concept. All members should be treated equally. ICC should get rid of bi-lateral series-es and seriously consider an ODI league with different tiers. That is the way forward so that Tier-1 based teams are the best ones vs. the logic of test playing nations are the best. For the next world cup all Tier-1 nations + Host nation should qualify. The question is how many teams should be in Tier-1 ? Probably not more than 16, considering all the teams with ODI status. If all the 16 teams play cricket against each other in the next 4 years, we can have a more competitive World Cup 2015.

  • on April 19, 2011, 17:23 GMT

    If cricket has be grown big time in associates,some craziness has to bring in minds of common peoples of associates. THE WORLD CUP may great way of teaching and letting common people to know about the gentleman's game.The format of next world cups seems to be exact opposite of it.Hope Mr.Pawar n company has some brain for cricket godwill not for money.

  • suresh_sksj on April 19, 2011, 17:22 GMT

    guys...all got it wrong...just copy the FIFA pattern....mind u....it's a WC....so every country that qualify for the game can participate....similar as FIFA....rules.....divide the teams as they do in FIFA WC....and have the QFs SFs and Final.....(the FIFA 2010 WC had 45 teams of 5 each in 9 groups...if they can do why cant ICC do it for aprox 22-24 teams from the world.....it's a WC and all who qualify to play should play.....have a qualification round...ICC has 3+ years to chose the qualifiers....other than the 10 ten test playing teams....the ide is to expand the game...not to restrict to just 10 teams....

  • on April 19, 2011, 17:19 GMT

    Agreed it should be a 15 team event with 3 groups and top 2 should play in 6 team round robin and 4 reach semis

  • on April 19, 2011, 17:07 GMT

    I guess they can go for 12 nation world cup

  • on April 19, 2011, 17:07 GMT

    Finally some common sense coming into the light

  • sonataca on April 19, 2011, 17:02 GMT

    I agree with Rajesh! That's what I have been thinking, 10 countries playing isn't a world cup AT ALL. It becomes more like a Cricket Community Cup. I feel all the countries who play cricket should be allowed to participate regardless of the fact if they are full, half or quarter members. Keep those restrictions to Test cricket only. Cricket is a gentleman's game, let's discover more gentlemen around the world, please? And yes, Mr. Pawar has done a wonderful job by bringing this topic up again...at least he has some sense of how a WORLD CUP should be...

  • samedwards on April 19, 2011, 16:59 GMT

    @aziz afghanall-like ,although i too wish there were a football-like qualifying for wc,it can never be possible because the full members will immediately veto it.Thats the problem with cricket.It is concentrated only in 10 nations & the balance of power is in asia,so icc cant antagonize them.Whereas,football is played & followed religiously in Europe & S.America,which has enabled the game to truly evolve into a global one.

  • on April 19, 2011, 16:51 GMT

    To be honest the top 9 should stay. Zimbabwe and the top 2 associates should have a triangular tournament. The winner should be the 10th team. I agree that Bangladesh is also pretty bad on days but it is a big cricket following nation and ICC has to have these nations for money purposes and they have proved themselves in the past.

  • on April 19, 2011, 16:42 GMT

    The recent word cup was well organized.. i believe they should keep it that way.. it gives a fighting chance to every team and a team can experiment in the group matches

  • Anil_vsk on April 19, 2011, 16:39 GMT

    @Rajesh Sv: All world never plays in any World cup in any sport.. only the best in the world... .So only 10 playing the cricket world cup is fair and gives respite for the viewers from boring one sided matches

  • on April 19, 2011, 16:18 GMT

    well a 10 team format is a good one but its sad bcoz of canada and kenya teams like ireland who were brillant in last 2 wc and netherlands were competitve dewseve to atleast have a qualification remember ireland is above zimbabwe in rankings so i think for spot 6 to 10 there should be qualification from team ranked 6 to world cricket league 1 teams and relegation promotion should be there in odi league

  • manish053 on April 19, 2011, 16:15 GMT

    ICC has to consider all aspect and Sharad pawar should appreciated for this issue to accept to consider in ICC meeting. ICC can not ignore request and demand of associate members. Issue is related to supporters of this game who wants to more thrill from this game and this thing put pressure on ICC.Now pressure is from associate memers who wants to reconsider to decision having 10 teams in the next world cup will be held in Australia. Foremost thing is to make game and tournament more thriller which may be possible without curtailing the team. revamped the format of tournament may be solutions of this issuse or may bed adopted other formats.

  • on April 19, 2011, 16:10 GMT

    I think we should not get them out rather we should think about the lessen of 50 overs match to 30/25 overs............or it could be T20. people don't have long 8 hours to view the full match. Anyway it is only my point of view.

  • on April 19, 2011, 16:06 GMT

    I thing the ICC should initiate a Mini World Cup on promotion basis as increased number of associates in World Cup really makes this extravaganza boring

  • kriskini on April 19, 2011, 15:58 GMT

    Excellent. World Cup has a meaning only when associates get a chance to participate. Does not matter if none of the associates can lift the cup or even make in to the semifinals.

  • on April 19, 2011, 15:54 GMT

    Its a WORLD Cup! all world should play! hope ICC realize it...

  • on April 19, 2011, 15:35 GMT

    atleast ireland and netherland deserve a fair chance

  • on April 19, 2011, 15:26 GMT

    Go IRELAND.................

  • on April 19, 2011, 15:14 GMT

    @jungleboytz . I think you make perfect sense buddy. Surely one of the whole points of any 'cup' contest is to give outsiders a chance to play(eg) defending champions. And surely. If test status is achieved on merit over a period of time, (instead of anachronistic rules for 'club' membership) that surely raises standards throughout the whole structure. I'm seeing very few comments wanting a 10 side tournament. Surely 12 has to be an absolute minimum. 16 was fine in W Indies - it was just not brilliantly organised. Less rest days - less travel- sorted! In test matches - players play 5 days on the trot!!

  • kool_Indian on April 19, 2011, 15:13 GMT

    Just curious - why is that nobody 'praising' sharad powar for his role in this?

  • MuhammadArsalanHaider on April 19, 2011, 15:10 GMT

    Why not have a 15 Team world cup with 3 groups. Top 2 of 3 groups go in Super SIX playing against each other, then top 4 qualify semi.. This is a newer idea and can be experimented.

  • debrchak on April 19, 2011, 15:09 GMT

    There should be some qualifying phase for all the team including top 10 nations....no automatic qualification........this way weaker team will get a chance to play with strong teams......

    ICC (i.e. 70% BCCI) please stop doing business with cricket and focus more on spreading it to more countries.....

  • BlorScouser on April 19, 2011, 15:08 GMT

    Hope representatives of the 95 associate and affiliate members will drill some sense into the executive board during the annual conference. The focus should be on setting up a qualifying tournament for the 2015 WC. At least the bottom two full members need to take part in the qualifying tournament. It should be held sometime towards the end of 2014 and it could be held in Aus-NZ. Hoping for a just decision for the associates to save the game across the world.

  • Hassan.Farooqi on April 19, 2011, 15:03 GMT

    A good test playing side might not be a good ODI team and vice versa, so all three formats need to be separate. Only top 8 team in each format should be tier one, with two relegations, and the next 8 in tier 2 with two relgations there as well. The rest would be in Tier-3.

  • Nervewrecker on April 19, 2011, 15:02 GMT

    Finally, Sanity prevails. Bring Ireland back. I am sure every cricket lover wants to see them in the World Cup. Pakistan - 2007, England - 2011, who will they ambush next?

  • on April 19, 2011, 15:01 GMT

    Finally some good sense prevailed ( from SP ) ...As it is these Test-playing Nations seem reluctant to make much of a commitment to theses Associates in terms of a significant plan of ODI games against them that would allow them the opportunity to improve their standard , so the World Cup remains the only place where they get a significant chance

  • scp101 on April 19, 2011, 14:54 GMT

    I don't know why it's so complicated you have 16 teams divided into 4 groups of 4 with QFs, SFs and a Final and please play two matches per day. It works for other sports so why not cricket.

  • wambling_future on April 19, 2011, 14:40 GMT

    For sure this is good news for Associates. A ray of hope for them. But still ICC should not increase the number of teams. 10 teams is fine. Top 8 teams (after certain period of cut-off) gets automatic entry in WC. Last 2 spot to be decided by a Qualifier. This will not only give Associates a chance also but at the same time it will give one more reason for bottom-half teams to step-up their performance in order to avoid qualifiers.

  • on April 19, 2011, 14:33 GMT

    It's a very very good decision.ICC should follow the FIFA who are giving chance of 32 teams in WC, I know Football is most popular in whole world and competitive team are there, why not ICC looking for total 20 or 24 teams in next 20 years for globalization of cricket.Now a days Afganistan also playing well, so they should have get chance to show their skill in WC, only T20 couldn't improve a nation to the cricket world.

  • The_sirpoka on April 19, 2011, 14:27 GMT

    As a Bangladeshi fan I am very pleased to hear the news...It's not a matter of argument whether the associates are better or worse than the bottom 3 test playing nations...What the associate countries participation means to me is all the low profile teams will have some chance to qualify for the second round...Is it likely that Bangladesh or Ireland will defeat 3 or 4 full-members in a group? I think not...But they have chance against eachother and against other associates...so a win or two against associates and 2 win against full members can give the opportunity of going farther in the WC to both Bangladesh and Ireland...I think it's time to stop criticising the low profile test teams...We are not worried about loosing to associates...It's the top teams who are afraid of having those accidents(!)...We are eagerly waiting for the decision to overturn...

  • meetsumeet on April 19, 2011, 14:27 GMT

    Go the football way. Have qualifying rounds for everyone except last year's winner and the host nations. Zimbabwe and Bangladesh (and even West Indies) do not deserve to get automatically selected.

  • Stark62 on April 19, 2011, 14:21 GMT

    @ honus

    It's about the rankings!

    Since, NZ aren't in the top 6, they have to qualify to be in the WC or do you propose that the top 7 or 8 teams get automatic qualification.

    Atm, I can see Zimb not qualifying for the WC and yes, I can see NZ thumping every associate team but my idea was to have the top 6 ranked teams with automatic qualification.

    Also, where the qualification takes place will also, be a crucial factor in determining the teams that get through because some teams like to play spin or pace and vice versa but I think it should be held, where the WC is going to take place e.g. 2015 WC Aus & NZ.

  • CricSamraat on April 19, 2011, 14:17 GMT

    Better late than never. ICC's decision on associates's exclusion from next WC looked hair brained whichever you tossed it.

  • Rakesh_Sharma on April 19, 2011, 14:16 GMT

    Few 1 to 2% posters justifying 10 team Wc are ignorant,do not understand sports especially cricket and meaning of having WC. This people must focus on other invitational tournaments. Be inclusive guys.2 spots for qualyfying.Altogether 12 teams. If roundrobbin than atleast one qualifier meaning 11 teams.Ideal 12 teams with 2 groups with round robin in each group.Top two for Semi finals. No quarter finals.

  • mrgupta on April 19, 2011, 14:12 GMT

    Sounds like a good news. Though they should not allow all Test playing teams to qualify automatically though. Atleast the teams ranked 8 and below should justify their inclusion. They are lying low in the table and should be tested against some better associate teams like Ireland, Netherlands, Canada Etc. I don't understand why teams like Bangladesh who got out on the lowest scores (twice) in the tournament and Zimbabwe who were clearly no match for top teams should be pampered and teams like Ireland omitted at their expense. If Bangladesh teams wants to justify their status then let them prove it. Statistically BD has Win-Loss ratio of 0.11 against Top 6 since Jan 2007, Zimbabwe has 0.12 and Ireland on the other hand has Win-loss ratio of 0.20.

  • Rakesh_Sharma on April 19, 2011, 14:10 GMT

    12 team is the best. No quarter Finals in cricket to keep more matches relevant. Split into two groups. Top 2 from each group for semifinals. If you have quarter finals than teams for WC becomes predictable and the real thing is just 3 matches. Worst format.

    Pawar go ahead for one good decision of your life.

  • on April 19, 2011, 14:10 GMT

    just a hogwash, nothing is going to happen. ICC will stick to its decision because of pressure from CA and BCCI.

  • landl47 on April 19, 2011, 14:07 GMT

    There has to be a place for at least two Associate nations. Otherwise, there will only ever be 10 countries playing at the highest level. If New Zealand, with 4 million people, can be a test and ODI nation, so can lots of others; however, they have to be given a chance.

  • mafiasam on April 19, 2011, 14:07 GMT

    I dont understand, why can't ICC adopt FIFA's system of qualification for the WC. Let all associates and full timers compete for WC spots and play the last 16 in groups of 4.

  • jonnybhai007 on April 19, 2011, 14:05 GMT

    Finally the voice of the cricket fans have been heard. Now to the ones that support the decision of a 10 member team. I ask u all, then what is the difference between Champions trophy and WC?. Other than the title change & that one is a 8 team tournament and the other a 10 team tournament. The best decision would be to select a 12 team tournament( which decision, i believe would wins a lot of support & would be fair to other developing teams).

  • McPiggle on April 19, 2011, 14:04 GMT

    Some good news in the midst of an INSANE decision by the ICC.

  • drewieoz on April 19, 2011, 13:56 GMT

    Now the ICC leaderships finally shows that the World Cup needs to be open to more than just the full members. The length of the World Cup needs to be also discussed with groups matches played over 21 days, semis and final over a week, total length of tournament: 28 days.

    I also have a structure for ODI cricket going forward.

    ICC ODI Championship (Every 3 years) Div 1-Top 8 sides (play home and away series) -5 match series. Final (best of five matches)

    Div 2- Teams 9-14 ((play home and away series) -3 match series. Final (best of three matches)

    After every cycle, the bottom 2 performing teams in Div 1 drop to Div 2, being replaced by the two finalists from Div 2

    Teams only play ODI according to their Division.

    Every even years, DIV1 also plays in the Champions trophy (over two weeks).

    Levels below the top 14 teams also play ODI cricket in the World Cricket League. over two year cycles, home or away, 5 match series (DIV 1), 3 match series (DIV2). This allows for meaning to ODI

  • Lennon_Marx on April 19, 2011, 13:54 GMT

    The 12 team format to me would seem the most logical, but I hope the lesson's been learned that the super 8/6 formula of the 1999, 2003 and 07 world cups will not return. The problem, for those who are wanting a shorter tournament is that the current television deal the ICC has in place for 2015 means that they are locked into having a minimum amount of matches that is in the 40s (there were I think 49 matches in the World cup just gone) and so a) unless you are going to play all group games 2 to a day you won't reduce the time taken by the tournament and b) the ICC and main television provider wants to ensure that they get the most big draw games (ie. India, England, South Africa, Pakistan and perhaps Australia playing most games possible) to maximise revenue. As a result the ludicrously stupid decision came down. It would be unlikely that Bangladesh or Zimbabwe would acquiesce to qualification anyway so 12 teams is really the only option if Associates are to be allowed to play.

  • smilingkillers on April 19, 2011, 13:53 GMT

    Keep the same format as this year but make following changes: 1) Top 3 reaches the next round 2) A1 and B1 are straight into semi final and B2 vs A3 and A2 vs B3 play quarterfinal

    This makes more or less each match meaningful. No match can be taken lightly as every team will prefer to make to semi final directly. Also, you don't know before start of the tournament which 8 teams will be in quarter final.

  • InnocentGuy on April 19, 2011, 13:52 GMT

    The problem with having too many teams is unlike football, cricket is an 8 hour game. You can have 4 football matches in the time it takes to complete an ODI. Naturally, the more games you have in the cricket WC the longer the tournament will be. A solution to that will be to have matches run simultaneously but that kills the excitement as it will then be like organizing matches just for the sake of having a tournament with more teams. The group matches will then be seen as something that is inevitable and has to be finished which in turn will suck the excitement out of them. So there are pros and cons of having many teams. I feel that the ICC did a good thing by making the T20 WC a 16-team tournament. That's the way to go if you want to make cricket popular. 16 teams, 3-hr games is how cricket can begin to spread.

  • DADA on April 19, 2011, 13:51 GMT

    12 team format. Top 8 test nations automatically qualify. Last 2 will play with top 6 associates for qualification and top 4 qualifies. Split the 12 teams into 4 groups of 3. 12 group stage matches. Top 2 from each group will go to the next round. Split the 8 teams into 2 groups and each team will play the other 3 in the same group. Another 12 matches. 2 semi and final. Total of 27 matches.

  • on April 19, 2011, 13:50 GMT

    I would be happy with either a 10 team or 12 team event, alongwith qualifying rounds for at least 2 places if its a 10 team event. But what surprises me that readers have this notion that the 7th to 10th rankings are permanently held by nZ, WI, Bang and Zim. Exactly the sort of complacency that could spell tragedy for your countries in the next three years.

  • on April 19, 2011, 13:50 GMT

    12 teams and 2 groups of 6 has to be the way to go. Or even keep the status quo with 14 teams, 2011 was the best World Cup since 1992 after all. Had Afghanistan been there instead of Kenya, as they would have if the qualification had been held in 2010 rather than 2009, there would probably have been another upset or two.

    Here's hoping that the ICC haven't just raised the associates' and affiliates' hopes again only to dash them (a la the last minute talk of 12 teams in 2015 before deciding that it'd be just the 10 test nations).

  • on April 19, 2011, 13:49 GMT

    ICC is screwing things up big time. Its almost like they want to slowly kill test and 50 over format and make do with T20 only.

  • on April 19, 2011, 13:48 GMT

    Associate members shod be given a chance. Those guys cant find a ground to play in. ICC shod encourage the Associate members. Saw the FIFA 2010 World Cup? 32 teams participated in it! Like that ICC shod encourage them. Associates are talented. Ireland managed to chase down a huge target against their rivals England. So Associates shod be in.

  • jungleboytz on April 19, 2011, 13:40 GMT

    Well this is good news but I think ICC should change their approach in managing the associate countries. With the tiers in place it would be a good idea to introduce the same calendar format down the line as it is with the top 10 nations. Let the associates hold tours (test & one day matches) amongst the tier they are placed and after two/three years when all have played home & away against each other the top two get promoted while the bottom two get demoted (similar structure to football leagues). This should apply to the current test playing nations too. With this the associate countries will also start getting experience in playing for the longer version of the game and slowly get competitive.

  • essky on April 19, 2011, 13:40 GMT

    I agree with Stark62, 16 teams in 4 groups, 3 group stage games, quarter, semi, final. 6 games at most for a team. The World Cup should be about advancing the sport, to focus on profits alone is a shortsighted outlook, to increase the exposure the Associate and affiliate teams would mean more Test teams in the next Decade, more teams, more money, especially with teams like Ireland, Holland etc... Why the need for these huge groups? Smaller groups need better preparation and a higher quality tournament, because teams can't afford to slip up with only three games to play as England did this year.

  • AndrewFromOz on April 19, 2011, 13:40 GMT

    At the very least it should be the top 10 ranked one day teams. Ireland is currently 10 and Zimbabwe is currently 11. If by some miracle, Zimbabwe replaces Ireland at number 10 then OK but the current situation, where the dismal Zimbabwe team gets in because it is one of the "club" is outrageous.

  • cass10au on April 19, 2011, 13:34 GMT

    Should go back to a 12 team tournament - Two groups of 6 Same as the 1999 World Cup was run with the super sixes Which meant you - in the 2 groups; each team played all the others in their group during the league stage. The top three from each group advanced to the Super Sixes, where each qualifier from group A played each qualifier from group B.With teams carrying forward their points from the games against the other qualifiers from their group. The top four in the Super Sixes contested the semifinals. If you had a match a day , the Tournament would`nt need to go any long then 30days & less if you more than one match a day played . Plus leaving 2 less assocaite teams involved then this year world cup .

  • bennybar on April 19, 2011, 13:33 GMT

    Finally good sense (not money) prevails. Ireland and Netherlands certainly added puch to the 2011 world cup and they deserve to be there.

  • gouthamkotera on April 19, 2011, 13:31 GMT

    It wasa ridiculous decision by ICC, clearly indicating their reluctance to take the game to coutries beyond the full members. Its also a surprise that Sharad Pawar for the first time has made a sensible comment on this issue. I guess the idea of automatic qualifications and 4 from qualifying tournaments will be the right way to go forward. if that happens, i am confident one or more among WI, BAN and ZIM will not make the cut of 10. Ireland wll surely make it and if Netherlands focus more, can also cause some upsets.

  • Anneeq on April 19, 2011, 13:28 GMT

    Finally common sense prevails!! I think for this particular w/c there should be 12 teams with the top 6 automatically qualifying and the last 4 full member teams plus the associates and 2 affiliates having to qualify for the last 6 places.

    The overall goal for 50 over cricket should be 16 teams, over 16 will make the tournament last way too long. The qualification process should be the same, 6 teams with automatic qualification and the other 10 have to play a series of qualifiers. This makes sure that the associates and affiliates get more exposure to quality opposition, because with all due respect to zimbabwe and bangladesh, the lesser teams need to face quality opposition to improve. The qualifiers should be played home and away as well to increase cricket's profile in the lesser countries. Let it be in tiny grounds with 3000 capacity if need be, if the public dont see quality players they wont take to the sport.

  • Oldnick on April 19, 2011, 13:26 GMT

    To have less than 5% of the World eligible to play in the tournament is an oxymoron. Rather rename it "The British Empire and ex Dominions Cup" as it stands now.

  • Robster1 on April 19, 2011, 13:25 GMT

    Ten teams is enough, but for goodness sake offer a place or two through a qualifying competition.

  • on April 19, 2011, 13:17 GMT

    1. Less teams is not the way to go. The game will never develop with only 10 slots. 2. As host, the number of teams should be decided mostly by the desires of the boards of Australia and New Zealand, not mostly the ICC. 3. Associates beating test teams is the best result possible for the game, more traditionally poor teams should be invited. 4. If it were up to me, I'd have a 32 team format, two test teams (and maybe Bangladesh) in one of four pools of eight. Top two teams go to quarter finals (or maybe an AFL style "final 8" giving a better run to the top four over the second four. And I'd have a playoff for third place (the two losing semifinalists).

  • on April 19, 2011, 13:15 GMT

    Conduct qualifiers for each region's national team, excluding the Top Test Teams. Straightaway go for 32 teams, divided in 8 groups. Then pre-quarters, quarters, semis and finals. Each team will play max 7 matches, if it reaches finals. This is the only way forward, if we need to globalize the sport like soccer. of-course the domestic structure of participating nations must also be looked into and bolstered. this will also check the talent drain from associate nations.

  • howizzat on April 19, 2011, 13:11 GMT

    Thank you Pawar for prevailing upon non-sensible attitude ICC think tank. Now at least sensibility is given a chance. Still 10 nation world cup is a very good idea. But then the best 10 should play it out. And this can be decided by a qualifying tournament in which the bottom 3 test playing nations( WI, ZIM and BN) shall play it out with the top 5 associates to decide the last 3 spots.

  • mthw on April 19, 2011, 13:08 GMT

    @Stark62... Why should it automatically be NZ, WI and Bang that go through the qualifying tournament??? As an NZ fan, I know we have reached the semi finals in 3 of the last 4 tournaments.... I think thats enough proof we automatically deserve to be there.... ALL current test playing teams + 3 qualifiers from associates should play at least... 2 groups... Less time between games is required.... Teams should be able to play every 3-4 days in a world cup....

  • aaamsaasza on April 19, 2011, 12:58 GMT

    10 teams is more than enough. I previously suggested through different articles/blogs and reiterating here again.................. ICC should identify one country as a (main) host even if it is played in more than one country. The country which hosts the final should be considered as host nation. Six teams should have automatic qualification for the main round and the host nation should be one of the six teams. The remaining five slots should be awarded to top five ICC ranking teams. The remaining four teams should be selected from a pre-qualification tournament which will feature the low ranking full ICC members as well as the associate members. This pre-qualification will also be a test for low rank ICC members to justify their test-playing status. And I am 101% positive that one or two test playing countries might be missing from the next world cup. This prep-qualification will also be an an opportunity to find a new test playing country(ies).

  • on April 19, 2011, 12:57 GMT

    @.RAGHURAM you should learn the basic cricket then comment.If need to qualify then all team should play eatch other like football then have to select 8 or 10 teams.If you think about cricket then have to give chance to everybody.So my openion is at lease 12 teams should go for next world cup.

  • Mudassir_Iqbal on April 19, 2011, 12:50 GMT

    i support the idea of Raghu Ram, that last two spots should be decided through a qualifier between teams who are standing from 9-12 positions. Top 8 should qualify automatically.

    or even with 12 teams worldcup, we shouldn't allow the last two teams to earn an automatic qualifier. they should compete for the seat in worldcup. like Bangladesh was totaly disappointing in this worldcup

  • Humbert_Von_Humbert on April 19, 2011, 12:49 GMT

    Sixteen teams. Four groups of four. Top two go through to quarter finals. This way you get more teams, spread the game to the world, every team plays less games, every game is important and teams like England can't afford to lose against the likes of Bangladesh and Ireland. Proper cup cricket.

  • ThKhan on April 19, 2011, 12:49 GMT

    not a good decision at all they should rather put a qualifier like top 8 teams qualified straight away and last 2 (doesn matter who would be at 9/10) gonna play with 2/3 associates and then two finalist will get the entry into the world cup -- it is more reasonable because group format does not necessarily bring the right team at the top :( please ICC if u can ignore the sayings of associates do ignore the sayings of ZIM & BAN or anyother n put them in a test to qualify whoever is good will qualify - so simple, atleast it will not make more mis-matches in WC

  • Mayuresh_Gaikwad on April 19, 2011, 12:35 GMT

    I think we can have 15 teams in 3 groups. Each team plays every other team in its group, 3 teams from each group advance into the "Super9". Here, each team plays all teams qualifying from the other 2 groups after carrying forward points against other qualifying teams from their group. Top 4 in the Super9 stage qualify for the Semis! Top six ranked ODI teams automatically qualify while the rest can slug it out for the remaining 9 slots. Total matches = 5x4x3/2 (group stage) + 9x6/2 (Super9) +2Semis+1Final = 60 games - not a whole lot (54 games were played in WC2003 with 14 teams)

  • gooey_kablooie on April 19, 2011, 12:35 GMT

    Really good news. I was hoping for a turnaround. Pawar is good for something. I also support the 10-team format. That provides more gruelling encounters. Zim, Bangladesh should be asked to play qualifiers. They haven't done anything drastic to be awarded a free entry.

  • yaa_right on April 19, 2011, 12:32 GMT

    That's why you should have something called IDRS (ICC Decision Review System)...The public can ask for review of some of the bad decisions taken by ICC :-)

  • on April 19, 2011, 12:32 GMT

    i suggest 12 teams instead of 14 can make it better also givign associates a chance to qualify as well with 6 teams each group i think the best 8 will stil make it the next round

  • on April 19, 2011, 12:29 GMT

    10 teams with each team playing with each other (45 League matches) and then a play-off (IPL Type) would be ideal. It gives more meaning to the league matches. We can have top-6/7 teams automatically qualifying based on ranking and a qualifier tournament for the remaining spots.

    The format of 2011-WC is meaning less. Excepting the 7 knock-out matches, all the matches didn't matter much. It is players and sporting pitches (with something for bowlers) that made the tournament exciting despite the stupid format. There was no team like Australia of 2003-07and this made the tournament quite interesting.

  • on April 19, 2011, 12:27 GMT

    If i was the president i would expand world cup to 32 teams divided into 8 groups tournment like football and Even Australia will play qualifing matches.

  • cricket2011 on April 19, 2011, 12:27 GMT

    If we split 4 teams with 4 groups, some time the 2007 world cup will repeat. So If India (120 Crore people) and Pakistan (18 Crore people) not qualified to next round that will be a huge loss to ICC. So they will never repeat that way. I hope they will continue either 2011(14 teams) or 1996 (12 teams) World cup format.

  • Sportsscientist on April 19, 2011, 12:21 GMT

    just shows what international pressure can bring!!!! lots of panicking from ICC about fans rebelling....especially the amount of indian fans!!!! I think all fans from the test nations not only want to see their nation do well, but also want to see fresh blood......not the same 10 test sides playing each other over & over.....Its stupid. Well done cricket fans.....ICC LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Khalidujan on April 19, 2011, 12:16 GMT

    There should be more teams so that the cricket will spread like fifa.In fifa there are lots of teams.

  • Natesan333 on April 19, 2011, 12:16 GMT

    @Nick Gentle I can't agree with you more. I am used to ICC making idiotic decision, I am comfortable with that, but this sign of commonsense just doesn't feel right :) just kidding, I truly hope they let the associates compete.

  • on April 19, 2011, 12:14 GMT

    I guess the 10 top ranked teams 2-3 months before the tournament should be given a chance to compete at the premier event. Ousting Ireland on the grounds it was is simply not fair to them or to cricket. The way they played against teams like India and England is commendable. With a little luck they could have been quarter-finalists. Glad Pawar intervened.

  • on April 19, 2011, 12:14 GMT

    Cricket may implode one day. It hasn't looked outward enough over the decades. Compare with football: FIFA has 208 full member nations. Cricket has only 10. Cricket is still at its core elitist. Football empowers; cricket excludes and divides.

  • on April 19, 2011, 12:11 GMT

    Pawar trying to look like a good Samaritan now after probably being the driving force behind the original decision in the first place. Hypocrisy is alive and well. I say stick with the original decision - because, hey, it is leaner, and works - but have a qualifier tournament a year before the WC where the bottom two of the 10 full member nations battle it out with the top 2 associates. I am pretty sure - and will be happy - Zimbabwe or Bangladesh will be among those missing out. Ireland is looking, for my money, to be more deserving of a full membership status. Not yet though. Lord knows the stakeholders of cricket world over have learnt the lesson of introducing an associate nation into full membership status far too soon (*cough Bangladesh cough*).

  • on April 19, 2011, 12:08 GMT

    12 team tournament is the way to go. I'd love 14, but to be realistic the ICC won't have that. A team like Ireland is in the cusp of Test cricket, barring them from the World Cup will kill their development and further lose their players to England. 12 teams, 2 groups of 6.

  • RakeshDash on April 19, 2011, 12:07 GMT

    Some hope for Ireland....Please dont let these players be poached by the poms.

  • Alexk400 on April 19, 2011, 12:06 GMT

    12 teams and bottom 4 should be selected from qualification round before start of worldcup. like 3 months ahead. we do not want longer worldcup.

  • IrishCelt on April 19, 2011, 12:04 GMT

    If cricket is to grow as a sport it is imperative that they allow more than 10 teams at every world cup. Look at the success of Rugby in Ireland in the last 10 years the same could happen with cricket if the elite few arnt afraid of us that is... Ireland should be at least allowed to participate in a qualiification campaign to see if they are good enough to play in the world cup along with every other team in the world regardless of their staus as a full member or not... If teams like Ireland can not play in these tournaments any progress made in the past 5 years will be lost and all of our good players will play for England, which again is an abosolute disgrace, how can you even call cricket a sport when it is governed by a small group of people who dont speak for real cricket fans & allow people to change International teams like its is British Soccer transfer window.

  • akashchandran on April 19, 2011, 12:03 GMT

    NALINWIJji has proposed the best format. 35 matches in 31 days. All matches involving test playing teams scheduled on different dates. No day with a match involving an associate member only. Gives opportunities to two of the best associate members but the interest in the tournament as a whole does not suffer. The proposal to have the top two teams in each group straight into the semis and the next two each to fight for the next place is a good improvement on the format of the 2011 WC(finishing 4th out of 6 and still having chance to win the Cup in 3 matches or toping the group and not making even the semis is not fair). Sorry Ivishalkumarji - your format is too long - too many minnows- too complicated.

  • proteasfan99 on April 19, 2011, 12:02 GMT

    we are trying to make cricket as competitive as soccer and we want to reduce the teams that is crazy. The only reason the minors do not perform @ the world cups is they never play the big teams during the 4 years in between. it will be their first time facing your Malingas bowling @ 150+...what do expect. develop cricket not kill it. There is so much cricket for a few players... soon it is going to die as those few players cannot keep up. Look at the World Cup injuries that took place due to tired and soe bodies.

  • andrew.henshaw on April 19, 2011, 12:01 GMT

    Thank god common sense has prevailed. Either 10 teams with a qualifier or 12 team competition (with qualifier for lower ranked full members)

  • on April 19, 2011, 12:00 GMT

    Watch out...!!Ireland's coming. If it does happen,its trouble for Zimbabwe... Bangladesh,WI & NZ too would need to be more consistent.Power corrupts but lets hope PAWAR saves us from this corrupt monopoly of Full Members... I still doubt whether this would really happen,but it still gives us sm hope...Hmmm...

  • micronizer on April 19, 2011, 11:57 GMT

    12 or 14 - no automatic qualification for "Test" playing countries - different format so differenr rules.

  • Merri on April 19, 2011, 11:53 GMT

    If the main concern is to reduce the number of matches, please notice that in a round-robin of 6, there are exactly as many rounds as in a round-robin of 5. Hence, the optimal number or participants seems to be 12.

    Of course, Cricketkumar's suggestion is worthwile, and would at least give Ireland and others a chance, but it seems unnecessary. What's the interest of having byes in each round ?

  • Biggus on April 19, 2011, 11:51 GMT

    Power to the people! Keep rocking the boat I reckon. The decision has yet to be made and if, those that care make enough of a nuisance of themselves we may still win this one. It does seem way too sensible though. Something's not quite right, something a little 'Twilight Zone' here. What's really going on.......????

  • randikaayya on April 19, 2011, 11:51 GMT

    Beautiful.. This will not only enhance ICC's reputation but it will also boost the BCCI's image with the pivotal role Pawar is to play. Credit where it is due, and salute from Sri Lanka, sir!

  • I.RAGHURAM on April 19, 2011, 11:46 GMT

    Good decision to review.... But 10 teams is more than enough. Bottom two ranked teams should go for a qualifier with the Associates and qualify for the world cup... No favours to non-performing Full members (read Zimbabwe/Bangaldesh/West Indies).....

  • on April 19, 2011, 11:45 GMT

    i think a 12 team tournament is the best way to go. 2 groups of 6. Basically the same as this year's tournament except 2 less associates and a few less matches.

  • on April 19, 2011, 11:45 GMT

    i think a 12 team tournament is the best way to go. 2 groups of 6. Basically the same as this year's tournament except 2 less associates and a few less matches.

  • Dr_Umesh_K_Dash on April 19, 2011, 11:44 GMT

    It is good atlast good sense prevailed in the ICC. Instead of expanding cricket and popularizing among other countries, ICC was trying to restrict within few counties. This is a very good sign for future of cricket. I hope next world cup cricket in 2015 will be played among atleast 20 countries.

  • on April 19, 2011, 11:43 GMT

    12 TEAM SHOULD PLAY IN WC.......................N.................. ICC SHOULD MAKE ONE FORMT LIKE FIFA...............

  • Notredam on April 19, 2011, 11:42 GMT

    Great new. 12 teams are ones to look forward.

    COme on Holland and Ireland.

  • on April 19, 2011, 11:42 GMT

    This is a very good idea.. Their expected to reduce the number of matches. Thats why they made the list shorter. but If you play with 16 teams divided in to 4 groups you can add more teams and also reduce the number matches

  • anishkm on April 19, 2011, 11:41 GMT

    Pawarji... You have all the supports.... let, all the world play cricket..

  • Stark62 on April 19, 2011, 11:41 GMT

    How about we do something like this:

    Top 6 are automatically qualified whilst, the rest battle it out for the remaining 4 spots.

    That would include NZ, WI, Bang and Zimb plus, another 4 associate teams.

    So, an 8 team group with the top 4 qualifying!

  • cricketkumar on April 19, 2011, 11:38 GMT

    but they should stick to the 10-team plan...bcoz that wud be the best formant...9 matches for all sides..the top 6 or 7 odi sides shud qualify automatically..and the rest shud be involved in a qualifing tournament along with ireland etc...

  • shamimkuet on April 19, 2011, 11:31 GMT

    It will be a very good decision if ICC agree.

  • WCdan59 on April 19, 2011, 11:27 GMT

    crickets future still has a faint pulse...Pawar you have my support!

  • anxroxy on April 19, 2011, 11:27 GMT

    more teams should be played in the world cup because in the world there are teams like Ireland. Ireland should be there in the world cup as we know its ability. Ireland's performance in the previous world cup cant be forgotten.

  • ivishalkumar on April 19, 2011, 11:27 GMT

    ICC can think of three groups A,B,C each consists of 5 teams(3 strong and 2 minnows Teams) Each team will play each othre once within groups and 3 top teams will make it to the supper 9 stage. in Super 9 Each team will play Other group's team once with carry forwarded points from group stage,and top 4 will qualify for Semis.

    No of matches in this format will be: League Stage : 30 Matches Super 9 Stage: 27 Matches Semi Final and final : 3 Matches Total 60 Matches

  • NALINWIJ on April 19, 2011, 11:24 GMT

    Hopefully commonsense will prevail and allow at least 2 associates will play in the world cup in AUS/NZ. I will reiterate a foremat of 2 group of 6 with one associate in each group. There will be 5 rounds with 6 games in each round. 2 matches involving an associate and other 4 matches involving full members. Supposing the 4 matches involving full members are played as day/night they will occupy prime time and will be shown at daytime in subcontinent and in the morning in UK/AFRICA while the matches involving an associate will be played at day time. If tournament starts on friday the group stages will end 20 days later on a wednesday. Top team in each group qualify for semi final and the next 2 teams play the next 2 teams in other group in a qualifying final on the weekend. A2 vB3 and B2v.A3 and the winners play in semifinals midweek and finals on sunday with 25 day night matches in 31 days.

  • on April 19, 2011, 11:23 GMT

    This makes too much sense to come from the ICC...

  • guppys_classmate on April 19, 2011, 11:19 GMT

    Oh... I never thought this is was gonna happen. Finally Pawar has done something sensible. Even if they retain the 10 teams, but have a qualification process am sure Ireland would beat Zimbabwe hands down and get into WC 2015!

    Hope to see more awesome cricket from Ireland...

  • on April 19, 2011, 11:15 GMT

    Great news to hear!! Associates deserve to be there

  • on April 19, 2011, 11:13 GMT

    A step in the right direction by the BCCI. It's good to see them show some leadership and responsibility for the growth of the international game.

  • on April 19, 2011, 11:10 GMT

    wow this is cool news for associates and affilates,hope they Expend the number of participent teams and make a good qualifing process. This news will bring some hope again to Afghan cricket for playing in big Arenas.

  • Jonah58 on April 19, 2011, 11:07 GMT

    This is very good news, but I hope the review is not just a smoke screen and that the views of the vast majority of cricket fans is heard and the format is changed to allow associates to try and qualify to compete in one way or another

  • jashan83 on April 19, 2011, 11:04 GMT

    Some hope at offering. I hope that they make the next 2 world cups a 12 Nation World Cup. Would love to see Afghanistan and Ireland playing the next world cup. These would be expanding the cricket beyond the Commonwealth. ICC wake up and reverse the 10 nation world cup

  • cricket2011 on April 19, 2011, 11:04 GMT

    Basically I don't like Shard Pawar (Money Power). But this decision is good for cricket. I except 20 teams will play Twenty20 world cup and 14 teams play in ODI world cup

  • pranavmg on April 19, 2011, 11:03 GMT

    FINALLY HE IS DOING SOMETHING GOOD

  • sandymen on April 19, 2011, 11:01 GMT

    Good to see that common sense has prevailed. Would be great if they come out with a more sporting solution. Hope for Irish fans...........keep the fingers crossed.

  • on April 19, 2011, 11:00 GMT

    ireland shuold come now.............

  • Knightriders_suck on April 19, 2011, 10:59 GMT

    Hopefully some sense will prevail.

  • MeowCat on April 19, 2011, 10:57 GMT

    Great news for Ireland.Maybe 12 teams?

  • jackiethepen on April 19, 2011, 10:53 GMT

    That is such good news. At least the ICC is not afraid of thinking again.

  • CFDanalysis on April 19, 2011, 10:52 GMT

    Wel Come Associates back to World Cup.......... No one can refuse if Mr. Pawar Desided

  • AnandSampath on April 19, 2011, 10:51 GMT

    Its really a very good move from the ICC president...

  • Gilys_Heroes on April 19, 2011, 10:48 GMT

    Thank God they are at least reconsidering. Qualification is required to ensure it is a WORLD CUP featuring the best 10 teams and not at 10 team trophy between good buddies. Hopefully reconsider and make 2015+2019 a 12 team tournament with same structure as last world cup

  • AnandSampath on April 19, 2011, 10:47 GMT

    Its really a very good move from the ICC president...

  • OutStumped on April 19, 2011, 10:43 GMT

    A re-look is good! Cricket fans will look forward to a more favourable decision keeping in mind the interests of associates, and the expansion of the game.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • OutStumped on April 19, 2011, 10:43 GMT

    A re-look is good! Cricket fans will look forward to a more favourable decision keeping in mind the interests of associates, and the expansion of the game.

  • AnandSampath on April 19, 2011, 10:47 GMT

    Its really a very good move from the ICC president...

  • Gilys_Heroes on April 19, 2011, 10:48 GMT

    Thank God they are at least reconsidering. Qualification is required to ensure it is a WORLD CUP featuring the best 10 teams and not at 10 team trophy between good buddies. Hopefully reconsider and make 2015+2019 a 12 team tournament with same structure as last world cup

  • AnandSampath on April 19, 2011, 10:51 GMT

    Its really a very good move from the ICC president...

  • CFDanalysis on April 19, 2011, 10:52 GMT

    Wel Come Associates back to World Cup.......... No one can refuse if Mr. Pawar Desided

  • jackiethepen on April 19, 2011, 10:53 GMT

    That is such good news. At least the ICC is not afraid of thinking again.

  • MeowCat on April 19, 2011, 10:57 GMT

    Great news for Ireland.Maybe 12 teams?

  • Knightriders_suck on April 19, 2011, 10:59 GMT

    Hopefully some sense will prevail.

  • on April 19, 2011, 11:00 GMT

    ireland shuold come now.............

  • sandymen on April 19, 2011, 11:01 GMT

    Good to see that common sense has prevailed. Would be great if they come out with a more sporting solution. Hope for Irish fans...........keep the fingers crossed.