ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 - India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh

[shravi]

Fair enough.

Either way, the World Cup is a big event. So what if he posted the thread a little early? We don't have to talk about the World Cup itself. The path to the WC encompasses quite a bit (e.g. blooding youngsters, dropping oldies, trying out fringe players).

 

[IanG]

I have to ask though why have they gone back to the Quarter Final System that they had back in 1996? It was virtually a fete comple who was going to make it and I don't think things will be any different this time round.

 

[rahuldravidfan]

Its going to be a great World Cup. With exactly a year to go, I think all the teams are looking very competitive. Talking about the Associates... Ireland has had a good run of-late. Ditto with The Netherlands and the 2003 World Cup Semi-Finalists, Kenya, and Zimbabwe always have a trick up their sleeve.

And the Full member nations... West Indies seems to be coming into their element, SA are on fire, so are the Aussies and the Poms. Look at Bangladesh, posting scores in excess of 220 on a regular basis. Pakistan and its unpredictability is a joy to watch. And hosts India, Sri Lanka & Bangladesh are going to ensure a World Cup full of fireworks.

The QFs are going to play a major role in this competition of equals

 

[icyman]

You are right. The re-induction of the QF stage will make the tournament more exciting than ever before. This will take us back to the format of 1996.

In essence it means that there wont be any 'dead' games. So just in case some one like an Ireland or Bangladesh spring up a surprise like they did in the previous World Cup,their games too would be interesting. And who knows,they might even reach the semi-final stage !

 

[SaiSrini]

The quarter-final is actually good. The league stage will provide a fair rating as to who the top four teams from each group will be. Also by the time the league stage is over, all teams should have warmed up really well and should be ready to take on the knockout stage of the competition. QF, SF and the Final will provide them with that knockout to lay hands onto the cup. It will actually be more fun than again having a Super Six/Super Eight and then go to semis.

 

[WubbaLubbaDubDub]

This world cup format is good... Group... KO... and Semi's and Finals

 

[icyman]

The Super 6 was a disaster. Also, it had the 'carry-forward' points, which eventually determined whether a particular country progressed or not.
As far as the S-8 is concerned, it simply lengthened the tournament.
Knock-out format is the best,cause by that, every match becomes interesting and you wont have any dead matches.

 

[Fatal Shot]

Never liked the concept of Knockout matches. A team which has played tremendously throughout the tournament, can have one bad game, and are eliminated. Sure the other way's will have some 'dead' matches, but at least we will get the four best teams, who have preformed the best in the tournament into the semi's.

 

[icyman]

It makes the tournament lengthy. Knockouts keep the teams on their toes and makes it interesting viewing for the general public as well. I feel this is a better version.

 

[SaiSrini]

Here we have 6 games for each side before the knockout stage sets in. So the best sides should have surely got up on their toes and be completely ready for the knockout stage. And the best teams should surely ace the knockouts. Instead of having more dead games, knockouts are more interesting because its A vs B and one moves forward.

 

[sohum]

Never liked the concept of Knockout matches. A team which has played tremendously throughout the tournament, can have one bad game, and are eliminated. Sure the other way's will have some 'dead' matches, but at least we will get the four best teams, who have preformed the best in the tournament into the semi's.

That's how it is in almost every other sport, though, isn't it? The final 8 teams play knock-outs.

Also, I prefer the situation where a team that has been playing tremendously throughout the tournament gets knocked out in a bad game late in the tournament than a team having a poor game in the beginning of the tournament getting knocked out early (a la India and Pakistan in 2007).

 

[pcfan123]

Knockouts are more exciting and marketable but they don't always tell you who is truly the best team.

 

[sohum]

Knockouts are more exciting and marketable but they don't always tell you who is truly the best team.

At the same time, the format of 4 groups of 4 teams mean that a top side can be crunched out really early in the tournament (like 2007). It's better to have two groups because then you will see the top sides face at least half of the other top nations in the world. You will weed out the "one-match upset teams" from progressing farther in the tournament, resulting in better cricket down the stretch.

For example, Australia won the 2007 World Cup without facing either Pakistan or India, two decent ODI units. We saw Ireland and Bangladesh in the Super 8's and although Bangladesh justified their presence by beating the Saffers, there were still a bunch of empty games. The semifinal line-up could have been different if India and Pakistan were in the second round, but there's too much chance of them being knocked out at the beginning of the tournament.

I think 7-team groups in the first round are the way to go and then you have to go with knockouts because the tournament would become too long, otherwise. The 2003-format of 7-team groups -> Super Six -> Semis -> Final is probably the best format, though. Australia went unbeaten in that World Cup and played all the top sides bar South Africa. They would've played South Africa, too, if Kenya hadn't earned points on New Zealand's forfeit.

--

In summary, the knock out system requires you to be the better team down the stretch whereas the system used in 2007 doesn't account for teams that take a while to warm up. Larger first-round groups allow the best teams to play the best teams more, to get a better idea of who really is the top side.

 

[tech.007]

is anybody bothered about the quality of pitches and stadiums in india.. BCCI will surely do it one day before the WC Final.

 

[surendar]

2003 format was good and better compared to the crap 2007 one. But, I don't think they would be having any idea to change the structure though. More games you conduct, more money you get especially in the subcontinent. BCCI will never miss that opportunity. 1996 WCup was a very good hit interms of money & so, no wonder we can expect the same( I meant in terms of being a good hit ) even now.