| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Omega |
Posted - 06/04/2011 : 06:29:03
 |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Omega |
Posted - 08/04/2011 : 08:49:33
Why the ICC axed the minnows
Lawrence Booth (Wisden Cricketer)
7 April 2011
Cricket really does know how to stuff things up. Even while a sixth of the world’s population was basking in the glory of India’s victory in Mumbai, it was announced that the big boys had ring-fenced the 2015 World Cup. This, as you must know by now, means no Ireland. Thanks in part to Twitter, cheap outrage spreads more quickly than ever before. But so does genuine outrage. And, bar a few men in suits, that is where the cricket community finds itself.
The ICC has been getting the blame, which is largely fair (but only tells part of the story). Their chief executive Haroon Lorgat tried to explain the decision to limit the next World Cup to 10 teams by saying Kenya and Canada had been a let-down. I remember that logic: my 26 secondary-school classmates and I were all made to sit through a detention once because two pupils, who refused to own up, had been making animal noises in a PE lesson.
But Worldcup2015-gate (come on: it was a matter of time) is more than simply another reminder that the ICC is alarmingly content to preside over foul-ups. It is depressing proof that the ICC is curiously unreal – little more, as we’ve always known, than the sum of its parts. If the big boys say jump, the ICC jumps with them, then has to put a brave face on when it breaks its ankle rejoining terra firma.
No, the real crooks in all of this are the full-member nations who greedily ushered through plans to limit the next World Cup to the Test-playing teams. Now, I can see the logic of a tournament of 10 teams, because it means fewer mismatches and less opportunity for football-obsessed newspapers to yawn condescendingly. But to scrap any form of qualification is myopic, idiotic and self-destructive. How other sports must be laughing at us.
Two sops have been handed out, both with glaring deficiencies. The 2012 World Twenty20 will contain 16 teams, which means 20-over cricket will become the default format among Associate members (the consequences hardly need spelling out); and the riff-raff will be allowed back into the World Cup proper in 2019, assuming a) 50-over cricket still exists by then and b) the Associates haven’t lost all their best players to other countries, or even professions, that, y’know, actually value them.
In the meantime, we will have to make do with a vision of cricket which is scarily redolent of life in the 21st century: while the rich feather their own nests and those of sycophants around them, the poor bed down for the night on a piece of cardboard. And the poor being poor, there is little chance for redress.
Even so, this decision isn’t entirely about money. After all, TV and the sponsors would presumably be more attracted to Ireland, everyone’s favourite underdogs, than Zimbabwe. No, this is just as much about politics: Zimbabwe and Bangladesh both have full voting rights, and both are in India’s pocket. You don’t become the world’s most powerful cricket nation without knowing how to play the game off the field too.
Three years ago I spent an enjoyable two days in Jersey, soaking in the sights and sounds of the ICC’s World Cricket League Division 5, part of the labyrinthine structure that exists beneath Test level and once provided a route to World Cup qualification. The cricket wasn’t always of the highest standard, but it was inclusive, well-organised and had meaning. The distant dream of the 2011 World Cup underpinned everything.
That meaning has gone now and all for the sake of cash and votes. This week, cricket feels a little greedier and meaner.
This article first appeared in The Wisden Cricketer and is reproduced by kind permission of the author.
http://wisdencricketer.com/blogs/blog/2011/04/06/why-the-icc-axed-the-minnows-lawrence-booth/
http://www.petitiononline.com/wc2015/
|
| Omega |
Posted - 08/04/2011 : 05:14:47
Stevie Lou extends a dinner invitation to Mr Lorgat....
Dear Haroon Lorgat,
Well I'm guessing you know what this is about, so lets get straight down to business.
Yes, it was that decision that you, and the ICC came up with on Monday concerning the number of teams allowed to take part in the 2015 World Cup. You didn't hide the fact before the 2011 World Cup that your preference for 2015 was to only have 10 teams taking place, even before you saw how the Associate Nations did this time around. Somehow I suspect you were hoping we would all fail miserably, and you could justify leaving us out in 2015 on the basis of that.
Well, its not hard to say that Kenya and Canada went along perfectly with your scheme, and apart from a batting performance against England, its fair to say Holland pretty much went along with your plans as well. Ah, but then there was that fourth Associate Nation who had no intention of going along with your theory, that's right, we Irish!
I suspect that when we managed to lose to Bangladesh, you thought everything was fine, even if we only lost narrowly. We could comfortably lose to the other big four nations, go home with a victory against Holland to 'keep us happy', and that would be that. And lets face it, almost three-quarters of the way through our game against England, things looked even brighter for you. There was Ireland at 111-5, chasing 327 against England, seemingly heading for a heavy defeat, and then, oh dear, it all went wrong for you, and right for us. Yes, Kevin O'Brien justifiably got all the headlines for his record breaking knock, but without the fine support of Alex Cusack and John Mooney, it would still probably have been in vain.
So lets see, the record World Cup run chase, the fastest World Cup century, and a magnificent victory over our nearest rivals, in a game described by many as the best of the tournament. And what made it worse for you, both India, and the West Indies (no, I'm not going to say more about an lbw decision that I would love to have seen upheld against, say, Sachin, for example?) failed to beat us comfortably either. All right, South Africa beat us comfortably, though even they at one point were certainly given a scare.
Oh, and did you notice, our Net Run Rate was better than both Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, teams that will be allowed to take part in 2015 as part of your test nation cartel. By the way, please tell me, when did Zimbabwe last play a test? And if I remember rightly, they stopped playing tests because of the awful results they were getting. Oh, and have you noticed something else, Ireland are above them in the ODI rankings even now!
So all right, at long last, I'll get to the point, Monday's meeting at the ICC.
I admit it, when I heard the ICC were going to discuss team numbers for 2015, I thought you'd finally seen the light. My expectation was an increase to 12 teams, the so-called Big 10, plus the two top associates, probably in two groups of six. At worst, you would stick to 10 teams, but give the Associates a chance to qualify in a group of six, the weakest two test playing teams, and the top four associate nations. Lets face it, hold it in the right part of the world, and you'd possibly get the result you wanted anyway!
But no, turkeys don't vote for Christmas, and Test Nations don't vote for not raking in the money at the next World Cup. After all, Ireland have beaten Pakistan, Bangladesh (more than once) and Zimbabwe recently, as well as England of course, so...
I'd just like to give you something to think about while enjoying your corporate entertainment at the IPL, which I'm sure your friends at the BCCI will give you. How can you call it a World Cup, when there is no way of qualifying for it, other than being part of the cosy test cartel, and then it doesn't matter how bad you are, you get in! Oh, and have you noticed the support we are getting for reinstatement for players from the test playing countries too.
So all right, this is the point where I flutter eyelashes, flash cleavage, or whatever else might be effective with you. When you can drag your eyes away, reconsider the 2015 World Cup qualification rules, just for me, pretty please. My view, go with the 12-team option, in two groups of six. Just two associates, so less meaningless matches by putting one in each group. Top four in each group to quarter-finals should keep everyone happy.
Alternately, stick with ten teams, but introduce some form of qualifying. Bottom two ranked test teams, top four ranked associates, and with top two qualifying to the World Cup. If Ireland doesn't qualify then, fine, we had our chance, just didn't take it, and that chance is all I ask for. But I can't see Zimbabwe, or Bangladesh really fancying that?
Oh, and lastly Haroon dear. If you want to meet, and discuss things, I'll be in Edinburgh for our game against Sri Lanka, and indeed the Scotland game the next day too, and at the moment, I have no dinner plans for either night. So...see you then, maybe? )
Stevie Lou
PS You haven't yet got a venue for the 2016 T20 World Cup, have you ever considered...Ireland!
http://www.cover-point.com/post/Open-Letter-to-Haroon-Lorgat-from-Stevie-Lou-Nicholls.aspx
http://www.petitiononline.com/wc2015/
|
| Omega |
Posted - 07/04/2011 : 17:31:32
Classic:
http://wisdencricketer.com/blogs/blog/2011/04/07/intercepted-email-memo-icc%E2%80%99s-next-move/
|
| Omega |
Posted - 06/04/2011 : 17:00:28
Campaign started on Monday after lunch when the news first broke in the morning of a 2 day meeting ........... no doubt the rest of the time was spent on "how much more money can we squeeze out of this farce".
www.testcricketforireland.com was set up some weeks ago fearing the worst.
|
| Nick_Admin |
Posted - 06/04/2011 : 16:33:12
then it should be on world rankings then , suggest a campaign is launched |
| Omega |
Posted - 06/04/2011 : 13:51:46
quote:
Originally posted by Nick_Admin
However how do ireland become a top 10 team should be your question?
No question Nick as Ireland are already ranked #10 in ODI's (ahead of Zimbabwe).
http://www.espncricinfo.com/rankings/content/page/211271.html
|
| Omega |
Posted - 06/04/2011 : 13:47:07
quote:
Originally posted by Nick_Admin
Im raising a financial issue, obviously the revenue for this games was less , and therefore not worth having them.
Im not saying that those teams shouldnt be there on merit, but the world revolves around money in these times and if Ireland or Holland cannot attract the viewers, then surely this is the reason why they have been rejected.
"Post-tournament ratings from India suggest that viewing figures for The Netherlands game with India were half the amount of the most popular group stage game, against England in Bangalore. Interestingly, however, India’s game with Ireland attracted 84 percent of that peak total."
Source http://www.cricketeurope4.net/DATABASE/ARTICLES4/articles/000007/000720.shtml
|
| Nick_Admin |
Posted - 06/04/2011 : 13:24:39
Im raising a financial issue, obviously the revenue for this games was less , and therefore not worth having them.
Im not saying that those teams shouldnt be there on merit, but the world revolves around money in these times and if Ireland or Holland cannot attract the viewers, then surely this is the reason why they have been rejected.
However how do ireland become a top 10 team should be your question? |
| Omega |
Posted - 06/04/2011 : 12:09:04
quote:
Originally posted by Nick_Admin
guessing they didnt though, otherwise if it was financially viable they would not make these decisions.
Maybe the Irish Passport holders are cancelling their sky subscriptions or using free ones.
money is tight
Which WC games do you suggest are the most financially viable Nick ? (for all future gatherings as it cannot be deemed as a WC as it is now a closed shop and teams from around the globe have been excluded).
\Bolton must indeed be a small place Nick if you think the holders of 40million Irish Passports reside in Sky only regions.
"Money is Tight" , having spoken to a few Irish Folk of late they are delighted will the billions of sterling lent to get Ireland out of a financial crisis (which comes around every 10-15 years) by their good friends in the UK. All they request now is a further 24billon Euros (not sure if that is per week or month) to stay afloat.
|
| The Man Hatter |
Posted - 06/04/2011 : 11:51:48
ICC was correct to remove the Minnows from the 2015 and 2019 World Cups.
Asian pitches helped level the playing field for Ireland. I can't see them many such impact on fast Australian pitches or seaming pitches in New Zealand. |
| Nick_Admin |
Posted - 06/04/2011 : 11:30:37
guessing they didnt though, otherwise if it was financially viable they would not make these decisions.
Maybe the Irish Passport holders are cancelling their sky subscriptions or using free ones.
money is tight |
| Omega |
Posted - 06/04/2011 : 10:12:52
I would expect the 40 million Irish Passport holders world wide would watch the game live in their respected regions. I'm also sure that plenty of Saffers and sub cont Asians would also tune into the goggle box for such a match. (after all Holland do tour India more than any of the Associate nations).
It was not so long ago Nick that a certain Hansie Cronjie (before his cargo plane flew into a mountain face) stated that England were so bad at ODI cricket they should be made qualify for the World Cup !
|
| Nick_Admin |
Posted - 06/04/2011 : 10:02:01
you have to ask, who wants to watch Holland v Ireland , is it worth it for the organisers, stadiums, tv companies |
| Guesty |
Posted - 06/04/2011 : 10:00:14
I say let as many countires join as they can (within reason), make the groups smaller like the football world cup so you only play 3 group games, seed it so the top teams still should all get through but the better weaker countires might have a chance of an upset. Play 2 games a day. That way you get more meaningful games, wider participation but you should still be able to shortern the length of the tournament. |
| Nick_Admin |
Posted - 06/04/2011 : 09:11:03
The top 8 in the competition should be given automatic entry into the World Cup, the other 2 places should be subject to a play off outside the competition. This surely can be acheived over the four years |
|
|
