ICC FTP 2024-31 Cycle

[Bigby Wolf]

So the women's are given a T20 version of Champions Trophy.

A good initiative though having the women's play a multi nation tournament every year.

 

[Bigby Wolf]

I still like or prefer the 14 team group stage followed by knockout format for 50 Overs World.

Maybe in T20 WC knockout will be good idea instead of super Eights.

But yeah more matches in group stages (the more games India plays) means more making opportunity from the sponsors and television.

You know the cycle - BCCI .

 

[icyman]

12 events in 12 years! That's maddening! Despite this, you would be hard put to find a New Zealand/ West Indies/ Associates hosting one of these tournaments. The ICC also made a U-turn on the bidding process and that effectively means more events to be awarded to the Big3.

To ensure the spread of the game:
1. Every 3rd 50-over CWC be awarded to an Associate/ group of Associates
2. Every 3rd T20 WC be put up for bidding among the full members. Let the Associates take the hosting rights under normal circumstances.
3. All U-19 CWC be hosted by Associates/ Affiliates

Back to the chalked out program, not a big fan of the re-introduction of the CT. Its just a filler tournament and people are going to get fed up with an ICC event each year. The CT will lack its prominence given the fact that the WT20 has been brought to a 2 year cycle. You might just see that it gets no traction at all in the cricketing fraternity.

On another thread, I batted for the CT's predecessor- the Knockout to make a comeback. Good point raised by someone there stating that the finances wouldn't add up to the ICC's coffers. In retrospect, with 8 events in as many years, I'm prepared to bet they will.

They again brought T20WC to 2 year cycle

It was on the cards! T20 is a fast game and many are keen on seeing their superstars in action. The 4 year cycle elevates the status of the domestic leagues around the world and that's something that the ICC would want to control. T20 rakes in more money as well.

CWC 2007 would have been the GOAT World Cup if it had gone straight to knockouts.

Every chance of an Ire-Ban quarter-final because of the seeding system they used that year

Quite agree with this and like the simulation that played out thereafter.

The U-19 CWC tend to use this format and it makes it interesting AF. If India and Pak, both were to qualify for the 2nd round, you would have seen the Super 8's being a prominent fixture in the World Cups.

Personally, I bat for the 1996/ 2011/2015 formats, makes the sudden death situations interesting.

Kenya in the 2003 semis (albeit with the help of a walkover) is one great stories that the cricket World Cup really has.

Sri Lanka in 1996, with the help of 2 walkovers, won the World Cup.

 

[wasteyouryouth]

But yeah more matches in group stages (the more games India plays) means more making opportunity from the sponsors and television.

As long as they're happy.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I think that walkovers and byes are a thing of past and are gone for good. Cricket has become immensely professional since the last decade.

So we might not witness anything of that sort, unless India Pakistan political issue allow for it, or something similar.

 

[icyman]

I think that walkovers and byes are a thing of past and are gone for good. Cricket has become immensely professional since the last decade.

So we might not witness anything of that sort, unless India Pakistan political issue allow for it, or something similar.

I wouldn't be so sure of this! There is a lot of political chaos in the world, at the moment.

As recently as the 2009 WT20, Zimbabwe weren't allowed to participate cause the English govt denied them visas. With speculation brewing over how the USA would like to bid for ICC events, it may not come as a surprise if Afghans/ Pak/ some specific members of any team are banned from holding US visas.

Walkovers may still happen if you get captains like Inzamam, who used to walk off the field, without knowing the rules of the game. Terror concerns may also prevent certain teams from taking part. If you remember, the Aussies didnt send their U-19 team to Bangladesh for the last edition of the World Cup.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I wouldn't be so sure of this! There is a lot of political chaos in the world, at the moment.

As recently as the 2009 WT20, Zimbabwe weren't allowed to participate cause the English govt denied them visas. With speculation brewing over how the USA would like to bid for ICC events, it may not come as a surprise if Afghans/ Pak/ some specific members of any team are banned from holding US visas.

Walkovers may still happen if you get captains like Inzamam, who used to walk off the field, without knowing the rules of the game. Terror concerns may also prevent certain teams from taking part. If you remember, the Aussies didnt send their U-19 team to Bangladesh for the last edition of the World Cup.

That's eye breaking

 

[icyman]

Another pertinent questions- how on earth are the ICC going to conduct the qualifying events for the Associates? There simply is no time? Will it be solely based on the rankings? Or do all the teams in the Super League get automatic invitations?

Personally, am in favour of inviting the Top8 directly to a World Cup and let the remaining eke it out in a qualifier. On current form, seems like SAF, SRL may miss out on a berth for 2023.

 

[Na Maloom Afraad]

Walkovers may still happen if you get captains like Inzamam, who used to walk off the field, without knowing the rules of the game.

If you know the story, you know that simply isn't what happened.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

If you know the story, you know that simply isn't what happened.

Na Maloom Advocate

 

[icyman]

If you know the story, you know that simply isn't what happened.

Inzi refused to take field after the break! The umpires tried their best to convince him otherwise. But he was adamant given that Pak were accused of ball-tampering.

The rules clearly state that should the fielding team refuse to come out, they match can be called off and awarded. After it had been awarded, Inzi came up with the lame excuse that he/ the management wasn't aware of such a rule. tbh, it ain't the first time that Pak has claimed they have been unaware- if happened during the inaugural WT20 wherein the then captain Shoaib Malik stated that his side wasn't sure of the sure when it came to a bowl-out.

 

[wasteyouryouth]

Another pertinent questions- how on earth are the ICC going to conduct the qualifying events for the Associates? There simply is no time? Will it be solely based on the rankings? Or do all the teams in the Super League get automatic invitations?

Personally, am in favour of inviting the Top8 directly to a World Cup and let the remaining eke it out in a qualifier. On current form, seems like SAF, SRL may miss out on a berth for 2023.

I was thinking that. On the one hand it might mean more cricket. On the other it means there will be World T20 qualifiers every two months.

Posted something about world cup qualification in one of the other threads where we all complain about the ICC.

I say: the best 10 teams in a World Cup qualify for the next one (as happens in rugby). Those ten teams could play in a Champions Trophy that is a mix of Super League, as it is now, with a final event. All other ODI eligible sides play for the remaining places. Either a longer-term super league style thing, two groups of 6 (+two non-ODI teams that could qualify) in a mini-tournament.

Honestly, it amazes me how the ICC come up with such rubbish when anyone can brainstorm better ideas in 5 minutes.

 

[Na Maloom Afraad]

Inzi refused to take field after the break! The umpires tried their best to convince him otherwise. But he was adamant given that Pak were accused of ball-tampering.

The rules clearly state that should the fielding team refuse to come out, they match can be called off and awarded. After it had been awarded, Inzi came up with the lame excuse that he/ the management wasn't aware of such a rule. tbh, it ain't the first time that Pak has claimed they have been unaware- if happened during the inaugural WT20 wherein the then captain Shoaib Malik stated that his side wasn't sure of the sure when it came to a bowl-out.

I just had to reply to the previous post because it totally caught me off-guard. Firstly, Inzi didn't 'used' to walk-off the field without knowing the rules. It was a single incident. Secondly, him being unaware of the rules isn't the full story tho, is it? He can come up with any lame excuses afterwards all he wants, because if my team was accused of ball-tampering by a cheat umpire, I would've done the same thing without even thinking about the result of a dumb bilateral series' game.

Now, not to deviate from the topic of the thread, I'd just like to ask - what would it take for the Champions League to be resurrected and be a part of the International tournaments' cycle whether it's governed by the ICC or not?

Post automatically merged: Jun 2, 2021

it ain't the first time that Pak has claimed they have been unaware- if happened during the inaugural WT20 wherein the then captain Shoaib Malik stated that his side wasn't sure of the sure when it came to a bowl-out.

C'mon now. Two completely unrelated incidents.

 

[Aislabie]

Now, not to deviate from the topic of the thread, I'd just like to ask - what would it take for the Champions League to be resurrected and be a part of the International tournaments' cycle whether it's governed by the ICC or not?

A far pile of currency I presume. It's tricky because the Champions League always lost a lot of money. It also always came to be a sort of crappy little pre-IPL warm-up tournament to the seemingly endless stream of IPL teams that took part. More recent attempts to revive the concept have been pretty shoddy to say the least.

But something like:

Main Draw
Sydney Sixers (BBL winners)
Rajshahi Royals (BPL winners)
Notts Outlaws (Blast winners)
Mumbai Indians (IPL winners)
Delhi Capitals (IPL runners-up)
Wellington Firebirds (NZSS winners)
Karachi Kings (PSL winners)
Paarl Rocks (MSL winners)
Jaffna Stallions (LPL winners)
Trinbago Knight Riders (CPL winners)

Preliminary Draw (2 progress)
Kabul Eagles (SCL winners)
Winnipeg Hawks (GT20 winners)
Leinster Lightning (IP20 winners)
VRA Amsterdam (DT20 winners)
Lalitpur Patriots (EPL winners)
Forfarshire Cricket Club (MT20 winners)
Northern Warriors (T10 winners)
Matebeleland Tuskers (ZT20 winners)

I'm not saying it has to be like that, but it would be incredibly cool if it was. And usual PC Champions League rules apply - a player's local team always takes preference so if Rashid Khan plays for Kabul Eagles then that's where Rashid Khan will play.

Also, the teams ought to be required to play a certain number of local players (looking at you, Winnipeg) but who am I to judge

 

[icyman]

Now, not to deviate from the topic of the thread, I'd just like to ask - what would it take for the Champions League to be resurrected and be a part of the International tournaments' cycle whether it's governed by the ICC or not?

Doubt this is going to happen. The CL T20 wasn't really governed by the ICC and in an era where T20 leagues are mushrooming in almost every nation, it would be hard to find a window that appeases all.

C'mon now. Two completely unrelated incidents

Okay, let's end this here