- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
What about those rabid anti-associates at the ICC demanding a cutback in teams for the next World Cup? And what about the rest of the world agitating to keep the event the way it is, as long as it’s shorter?
Such is its volatility, the topic of the 2019 format is one that could start a fight in an empty room.
Confirmations, denials and petitions have put everybody on edge, with Virat Kohli abusing blokes on spec, and rumours circulating that the O’Brien brothers tried to punch a grapefruit that resembled David Richardson.
However, there is a way that we can all get along, provided we all work as a team and do it my way. My solution, while totally ignoring the crux of both proposals from the ICC and the wider public, speaks to the heart of all cricket fans.
It’s as simple as this: 2019 should have more games with more teams, meaning more everything! Because what could be better than gorging ourselves on more cricket?
In formulating this sickeningly sensational plan, I simply looked to the game’s bedrock values. How can we uphold its reputation as history’s greatest time-inefficient leisure activity, while also respecting its modern principle as an industry totally at the mercy of broadcasting agendas?
More or less, less is not more. More is more! Like anything in the modern day, just make it bigger and with more glitter. The game’s already-pouting lips just need another sexy pump of collagen.
But in what fashion do we enhance this beauty?
The legendary Sachin Tendulkar has suggested a 25-team competition, but if cricket is serious about being a genuine world frontrunner, it has to ignore such beacons of integrity at all costs. The cream of the money-printing ideas always come from the unethical and self-serving mega-global organisations of this earth, and that’s why FIFA’s 32-team tournament model is a perfect fit – just with a couple of tweaks to give it some distinct overtones of the gentleman’s game.
With an England-free game of cricket running approximately six times longer than a game of football, we just give their compact, one-month format a minor ICC scale-up to a 24-week extravaganza, then load it heavy with a thorough pool phase followed by the Sweet Sixteen, Electric Eights, Superfluous Seven and Super Six stages, which then leads in to the finals and playoffs to determine every position down to 32nd.
Plus, with the need for an additional 18 teams, nobody is left on the outer bar the 164 nations who don’t make the cut. New cricketing outposts will open up in places like Indonesia, the Cayman Islands and the West Indies, meaning a potential 240 per cent increase in abstract post-wicket break-dancing and Hamid Hassans.
Think about it. More inter-associate thrillers, more all-member nation blowouts and more boofhead commentary diluted. More money that the common fan will never see. Mind-shattering scores that are lost in more astonishing mind-shattering scores. Half a year of entire television schedules absorbed. Cricket fans engrossed in an everlasting binge. Family bonds disintegrate.
With the tournament slightly stretched, timeframes for National Hamstrings would no longer be an issue, with enough time to reattach a new leg. Kevin Pietersen would have forever to return for England, redeem himself, and then retire before the completion of the group stage to commentate on his team’s embarrassing elimination at the hands of Mali.
Then, the piece de resistance. The World Cup final, consisting of 100 overs per innings split by a two-hour innings break for commercials, corporate events and the suspension of consciousness. And with time not an issue, let’s triple-check every full toss hitting the batsman on the tram line for accuracy too – 12 DRS referrals each should cover it.
A champion determined from 32 teams over 24 weeks. To be honest, I’m yet to hear any other ideas that match it for astonishingly outstanding supremacy. I can hear you all right now, “Is there a petition for this masterstroke? Where do I sign!”
After all we’ve been through, we know that an inflated ICC event is the answer to all ICC event conjecture. If you’re not convinced, just look at the unforgettable memories of the mega-successful 2007 World Cup in the Caribbean – it’s still running as we speak. Now that’s just solid sustainability.
But of course, unless you’re an umpire, the owner of a subcontinent textiles company or Test Match by Crown and Andrews, controlling anything in the game of cricket is virtually impossible, so I’m not sure that my idea will be given the time of day by the power suits at the bureau. We can only hope that it doesn’t.
Now over to the experts. Roarers: what is your proposed format for the 2019 World Cup? Should we take our time and embrace the world, or should it be fast and loose for elitists only?