Minnows will be barred from the 2015 World Cup in Australia and New Zealand after the ICC refused to heed howls of outrage from the game’s developing nations.
Haroon Lorgat, the ICC chief executive, said the World Twenty20 will be increased to 16 teams instead of 12, while the 50-over World Cup will be trimmed down to 10 from the current 14.
The ICC’s argument, echoed by Cricket Australia, is that minnows are better suited to playing the T20 format
“We have felt in the past few years that Twenty20 is the best format to develop the game world-wide and it provides a better environment for competition,” Lorgat said.
“The 50-over format is more skill-based and suitable for the top teams.”
Lorgat’s views, ahead of the 50-over World Cup starting on Saturday, is bound to further anger the minnows, who believe they are being muscled out in favour of the Test-playing nations.
Cricket Kenya chief executive Tom Sears said on Thursday the ICC will not be acting in the interests of the game if the smaller teams were locked out of the next World Cup.
“If we have to improve on the standards, there is no point of denying us the opportunity of competing at the top level,” Sears told AFP.
“We had a meeting with the other associate countries during the World Cup training camp in Dubai last week, and we plan to raise the matter again at the World Cup.
“We are disturbed about the whole issue,” he added.
In an interview with the Wisden Cricketer magazine, Sears termed the decision as “scandalous and bloody ridiculous”.
“I’ve no desire to be diplomatic… Not to let anyone else in is scandalous. It’s all about money, power and votes – and that’s not good for cricket,” he said.
Plans for the 10-team version are already well advanced, as CA and NZ Cricket work to finalise fixtures and venue allocations.
“Emerging nations are important but it is also important to tighten the World Cup,” a CA spokesman said.
“Our view is that it has been too long for a number of years and the public have become confused by it and lost interest in it.”
Competing players at the 2011 tournament are united in their view that smaller nations should still be given a chance in the 50-over event.
Australian paceman Shaun Tait has said it would be unfair to rob emerging nations of the opportunity.
“There’s no reason why you can’t have those teams in the competition,” he said.
“To play against the best players and sides in the world is massive and I wouldn’t want to take that away from anyone.”
Former Kenyan captain Steve Tikolo and batsman Collins Obuya have also voiced their concern, saying the World Cup remained vital for the development of associate nation cricket.
While there have been some hugely lop-sided contests down the years, there have also been some memorable “giantkillings”.
Kenya became the first non-Test playing team to reach the semi-finals in 2003, and Ireland produced their biggest upset over Pakistan in the 2007 tournament in the West Indies.
Ironically, a poll on the ICC’s website showed 73 per cent in favour of a 16-team World Cup in 2015 with only nine per cent supporting a 10-team competition.
Russ
Guest
The difference with the football world cup is that in the cricket edition, only a 1/3 of the teams are make-weights, so most of the games they play are mismatches that they lose; in the football edition 2/3 of the teams are make-weights, so most of the games they play are against each other, and are very competitive.
Brendon
Guest
Incredibly wrong. Ever looked at the IPL figures? If you're seeing a drop off in numbers its due to the IPL, not a lack of interest in cricket. And it gets back to my point that the BCCI see the big bucks in cricket's long term is in a franchise league - not international matches.
Brendon
Guest
How is that different to basketball at the Olympics? Or even the football World Cup? Spain, Germany, Netherlands took the top 3 positions. Uruguay in 4th is hardly a major shock considering they have 2 world cups. What is it about cricket fans and commentators that makes them want to cannibalise their own sport?
Tony
Guest
Bit different at this World Cup, which, according to Jonathan Agnew is: "a month of matches designed to knock out the minnows."
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
Lopati, Have you any idea what the TV rights to a World Cup are worth ? You can buy a hell of a lot of cleaners. Nope, the minnows are being tossed out not because they can't beat the top teams, but because they can.
lopati
Guest
Can't be helped, in for example Melbourne how many people will pay the gate fee to watch SA play Canada? Sure there is a sizeable SA expat community (Canada not so much), but would enough show up to pay the power bill, the ground and security staff, will the guy selling meat pies make enough make it worth opening? Sure there is the TV rights too but they have their costs to cover too. Using the bigger games to subsidise smaller games is also becoming uneconomic without crazy ticket prices that would deter more people than it makes in extra takings. Even bigger games can suffer, the pricing often is based on an expected crowd but even two "better" teams playing a dry rubber can see attendance fall below break even (these also eat into the "subsidised games" allowance). It's the money, not just 'the big greedy organisation' money, but down to the dollars to pay the cleaners for doing their job when the match is over.
GanG
Guest
Cricket in India is actually dying......back in 2003 and 2007 people were crazy about cricket....i remember watching the 2003 world cup skipping school.....my brother didn't attend his college fort 2 whole weeks.....then in 2007 i remember the anger and sorrow after india's early exit...but after 2007 everything is coming down....no. of people watching cricket is going down while the no. watching European football is increasing.....and some predicts that football popularity will equal that of cricket in 5 years or so;....... most people don't even know our team......
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
In the warmups, Canada did better against England than Australia did against South Africa. Much better, in fact.
Ben Carter
Roar Guru
Agree totally. Dreadful statements by the ICC CEO. Associates have no skill? What rot. All the more reason to go for Ireland, Holland, Kenya, Canada at this World Cup, and Afghanistan, Scotland, Namibia etc elsewhere, too!
Brendon
Guest
Ultimately the BCCI doen't care about developing nations. Seriously, how much money do they bring into cricket? Take major league baseball for example. The amount of money is massive but its primarily American (with 1-2 Canadian teams). India knows that due to its size and the popularity that domestic franchises and internal matches is where the money is going to be in the long term. Already most of the money going around in cricket is in India. With the Indian economy growing imagine what it will be like in 20-30 years. Cricket in Australia, while relatively healthy now, will die a slow death as it will it most other countries. Why bothering developing other countries when in 20-30years its all going to be about India? Even if Ireland becomes a top cricketing nation how much money will they bring to the table. Or Kenya or Nepal? Or even Afghanistan? Cricket has been a niche sport in the Netherlands for a long time without it ever growing. While cricket is small in the Netherlands its well structured and equipped but the sport is not going to grow there. Cricket in Canada will never progress past the ex-pat stage. Same with the USA. What will make $$ is a big time domestic league in India where ex-pats living in countries like Canada and the USA can watch on cable TV. No one in Canada or the USA needs to play cricket, just watch it. Thats where the real money is.
Brendon
Guest
It looks like they're going to kill off the Champions Trophy as an ODI tournament in 2013 and turn it into the inaugural Test Championship. And of course that is going to be in England.
Brendon
Guest
You do realise this move is made to kill off 50 over cricket after the world cup in India? Dont tell me you didnt see this coming. A headless, blind chook could have seen this coming. This is 50 over crickets last hurrah. It probably would have been killed off earlier a couple of years ago if it wasn't for the world cup being in India. The amazing thing is that Cricket Australia is agreeing to this. The 50 over world cup by 2015 will be an irrelevant minor event. Already at this world cup interest is well down. Compare the excitement to the 1999 world cup to this lead up. We already have the Champions Trophy which in which the 10 test playing nations play only. So what difference will there be between a World Cup and Champions Trophy? Australia has not had a major cricketing tournament here since 1992. We've not had a champions trophy or Twenty20 world cup. Why? South Africa and England have had both. Sri Lanka has the next T20 and had the champions trophy in 2002. Bangladesh has had a Champions Trophy and is scheduled to host the 2016 T20 world cup. Even the West Indies has had a T20 world cup. Out of the 10 test palying nations 6 had have either/both Champions Trophy or T20 world cup. Only Zimbabwe, Pakistan, Australia and New Zealand have not. By 2015 Australia will not have had a major cricketing tournament for 23 years and Cricket Australia have just agreed to put 50 over cricket in its coffin without getting the rights to host a T20 world cup? What this country neds is a major cricket tournament to re-ignite interest. But the "world cup" in 2015 will not do it and we can't get a T20 world cup until 2018. Is the BCCI and its puppet, the ICC, trying to kill cricket in Australia and why is Cricket Australia standing there watching while the ICC stick the knife in? I still can't get over that by 2016 Bangladesh will have hosted a Champions trophy, T20 world up and co-hosted a world cup in which during that time Australia has had NOTHING.
Timmuh
Roar Guru
Terrible decision that will set back the game in a big way in these nations, unless the ICC and major cricketing nations adds something huge to their pathway - but given the contempt the big nations (especially Australia) treat even the smaller full members that seems incredibly unlikely. The only good thing about this is that in part of their "justification" the ICC are admitting that skill isn't really a major feature of T20. How are these teams to develop if their top level exposure is limited to is less 'skill-based'? Yes, the Associate nation play amongst themselves, but the top ones need regular exposure to the next level up - be that First Class teams, or fully fledged international sides, and for all its faults the world cup has provided some of that (though once every four years is nothing like enough, even that is now to be taken away).