For the second time in as many tournaments, the ICC has announced the next World Cup will be reduced to 10 teams.
The last time, in 2011, caused an uproar from the associate nations resulting in an ICC backflip.
But here they are again, making the announcement for the 2019 World Cup, and once again the associates are protesting.
And it’s hard to argue with them. So far in this World Cup we’ve seen Ireland make further claims to their Test ambitions with a win over West Indies. Scotland come within three wickets of a win over one of the World Cup fancies in New Zealand, and Sri Lanka got a narrow escape against World Cup debutants Afghanistan.
At the very least the associates have been competitive so far on the biggest stage one-day cricket has to offer. Why then does the ICC want to restrict these teams from exposure to the big tournaments?
They say it’s to protect the standard of the World Cup, as near every tournament we see a minnow nation upset one of the big boys, then by the next World Cup they seem to be replaced with another minnow in qualifiers.
The issue the ICC has with these teams is between World Cups their exposure is almost non-existent. Boards have no real chance to continue whatever momentum gained from World Cup exposure, no real chance to keep the game in the minds of the public. No matter how big or small the interest, there are very limited chances to grow the game’s profiles in different markets.
Since cricket’s very first Test match in 1877 only 10 other nations have gained Test match status. What other international sport has such a slow rate of development?
It’s bewildering how the ICC can seemingly sit on their hands and not push the game even harder in new developing markets, especially when Ireland have proven that with the chance to develop there can be success.
Instead Ireland, while waiting for Test status, have to watch home-grown players head over to England to play international cricket – Eoin Morgan and Boyd Rankin have in Tests, while Ed Joyce played ODIs for England. Despite Ireland losing some of their most talented to English cricket, they are still putting out a competitive side – almost certainly a side better than some Test playing nations.
Meanwhile, what Afghanistan, another associate, has been able to achieve in such a short time under the extreme difficulties the country as a whole has been under is massive. Imagine what they might be able to achieve if given a real crack at it?
Maybe it’s time we saw the ICC put in some serious investment in the growth of the game, the growth of the ‘minnow’ nations, rather than letting the same small pool of teams fight it out time and time again.
Amvask
Guest
I am a very sports-interested Norwegian in my twenties. Football, handball, all the winter sports, the 4 american, tennis, racing, cycling, athletics, boxing, golf.. anything. And the sports I am not that interested in, still we would get a lot information on it in Norway. But living 20 years in Norway, following sports I have never Once encountered any cricket. I knew it was some English sport with a bat, and supposedly very difficult to understand, but that was basically it. It was not before I went on a trip to Australia, and was invited to a game down under that I was properly introduced to the game. And I absolutely loved it. The game is of course hugely popular in some areas of the world. But (and here comes the point of this endless post) where it is not one of the big sports it is completely invisible. I think this is both a pity for us not from cricketplaying countries and a pity for cricket. Football, another English sport, is the obvious example. Why is football so much more widespread than cricket? There might be many reasons, but I do think that the "magic" of the world cup and how fifa have always prioritised spreading the game certainly is a part of it
Harvey Wilson
Roar Rookie
If they want to stick at 10 teams, maybe the bottom 2 should have to play off against associates and have a promotion/relegation system. The associates would then get more exposure and have a chance to become bigger and better. I have my doubts that Bangladesh and Zimbabwe are considerably better than some of the associate countries. They deserve a shot at moving to test status.