Cricket Australia supported culling minnow nations from the World Cup, while saying the length of the recent one-day showcase robbed Australia of momentum.
The International Cricket Council (ICC) has announced four minnow nations won’t contest the next World Cup, to be staged in Australia and New Zealand in 2015.
Only the 10 Test playing nations – Australia, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, England, South Africa, New Zealand, West Indies and Zimbabwe – will feature.
The ICC move comes amid criticism of the most recent World Cups for protracted length and lopsided games between the traditional powers and weaker ICC associate nations.
Cricket Australia chief executive James Sutherland said Australia’s schedule for the World Cup was “unsatisfactory”.
“The Australian team had two seven-day breaks at one stage and in that period, the only cricket they were playing was against minnow countries,” Sutherland told AAP on Tuesday.
“So from our point of view, we went a bit stale there in the middle (of the tournament).
“I’m not making excuses, but it was difficult for the team to build any momentum into what proved to be a clutch match against Pakistan immediately before the quarter-finals.
“The batsmen hadn’t faced full member attack for nigh on a month.”
Australia, whose pool match against a strong Sri Lankan side was washed out, ultimately were beaten in a quarter-final by eventual champions India.
Sutherland said having 10 nations compete in 2015 was ideal.
“The decision to go to a 10 team competition is something we’re very supportive of,” he said.
“In a format sense, we have seen that 14 teams doesn’t work, we have seen 16 teams in the past doesn’t work.
“We believe 10 teams will be a really good format for the event, perhaps it might be a one round league where everyone plays each other once and then a semi-final and a final.
“The ICC needs to make those decisions, but when you think about that as a format, every match has great context … and we will see some really good quality cricket.”
The ICC action was blasted by Ireland, who scored an upset victory over England in the recent World Cup but have been punted from the 2015 tournament.
“I cannot think of a decision which is less cognisant of the principles of sport and fair play than the one that has been taken,” Cricket Ireland chief executive Warren Deutrom told the Irish Times.
The ICC said the 2019 World Cup in England would also be contested by 10 nations but there would be a qualification process, yet to be detailed.
Lolly
Guest
Sutherland is proud of the decision. He's said that playing minnows - and the schedule - were part of the problem of Aussies' poor showing. What a lazy-minded clown. He believes cricket fans will swallow anything.
Fool
Guest
It should go deeper. Zimbabwe and Bangladesh are absolutely crap. Ireland is stronger than Zim and the Bangas. Good move ACB.
Russ
Guest
Chris, it won't be shorter. In fact, it will be longer, because teams need to rest and travel and they'll play 9 games each. Most likely a 42 or 43 day tournament. And it won't be "competitive" on two levels: because the two weakest test nations (the two that suffered the biggest margins of defeat in the tournament just played) will play 16 games against the rest; and because there is no chance they'll win the 5 or 6 games they'll need to make the semi-finals. As counter-intuitive as it sounds, larger tournaments are shorter and more competitive, because they have smaller groups, play more games between associates, and allow for more over-lapping games.
Brett McKay
Guest
it should Chris, true, but it's hard to see how that would happen if they go to the mooted round robin in the first stage, particularly since they (as in Indian broadcasters) won't want more than one game a day...
Russ
Guest
They can't play 16 teams because it leaves open the possibility that an upset will remove an "important" team, and it comes to too few games without the protracted super-8 disaster of 2007. The best format would be 20 teams, the same as rugby, with the slight tweak that 1st goes direct to the q/f, while 2nd/3rd go to a knockout, to give the weakest teams something to play/aim for. But India would only be guaranteed 5 games in that format, and we all know their fans only watch one team. It is money-grabbing and self-serving politics, not logic. And I can accept that, when other countries do it, because I'm a cynic when it comes to politics. But I can't when Australia is at the fore-front of the decision. The second most senior member of cricket, the most successful, and the third richest also happens to be the most elitist, with the worst history of helping to develop other nations of anyone. It is an embarrassment and a disgrace.
Chris
Guest
I agree with cutting the number of teams to 10 - it should result in a less protracted tournament and more competitive games. However the teams should be there on merit - i.e. base it on the rankings, or qualifying games, or whatever. I don't understand the reasoning for using a Test match status for a ODI competition - other than political reasoning of course...
Brett McKay
Guest
everyone agrees that the comp was too long, but that's caused by the protracted nature of the pool stages. And that situation won't be resolved by a ten-team round robin either. They could easiy have kept 14 teams, even gone to 16 teams if need be, if they would just go to more than two pools. The pool stage doesn't need to go on forever, it just needs to establish quarter-finalists. With all that in mind, the decision to not just cut back to ten for 2015, but to also remove qualifying is superfyingly short-sighted. I'm not sure what's more ridiculous actually, that the Associates WON'T be able to qualify for 2015, or that they WILL be able to for 2019....
JAJI
Guest
So the "worlds best sporting adminsitration" is now blaming momentum for our early exit. Forget poor planning, useless selectors, a short sighted CEO, overpaid players and a fledgling domestic comp.....its the minor countries who are to blame
Intotouch
Guest
Ok then, have a world cup tournament with the top ten teams. Oh wait! The top ten ranked teams currently includes Ireland! And has done for a while? Oops! That's inconvenient. Oh well, who cares? Let's have a competition involving ten teams that we want to include, using other criteria. One that has nothing to do with merit. Yes. That sounds perfect.
amazonfan
Roar Guru
Yes, let's cut the number of nations to make it easier to win. That attitude really annoys me. While I do think the structure needs to be changed, any decision must be taken for the good of the game, not to satisfy the self-interest of any member nations.
Whites
Guest
Another idiotic decision from the guardians of cricket.
EvertonAndAustralia
Roar Pro
It should've been cut to 12 teams two groups of six.