With the ICC World Cup in progress and debate raging about the format of future World Cup tournaments, there are many opinions being thrown around. Mostly these relate to whether we should have 10 teams or 16 in future tournaments.
There is also a debate as to the format of the tournament. Should we have pools of teams or a round robin format? How long should the tournament take? Should there be a qualifying stage or not?
Arguments supporting the inclusion of more teams centre around the notion of growing the game worldwide and giving the ‘associate’ countries more opportunity and experience.
Arguments for a smaller number of teams focus on the length of the tournament and the quality of the matches being played.
So let’s have a look at some statistics and see if we can draw any conclusions.
The table below is taken from the Cricinfo website and shows the One Day games played by each country over the last 12 months. It includes games already played in the current World Cup tournament.
I have broken down the games into those played against ‘Test’ nations, ‘associate’ nations and ‘other’ matches. The ‘other’ games are tour matches played against state or regional teams or ‘a team’ matches.
Country | 50 ov Matches | Vs Test | Vs Assoc | Vs Other |
Australia | 22 | 21 | 1 | |
Bangladesh | 20 | 16 | 2 | |
England | 30 | 27 | 1 | |
India | 24 | 20 | 3 | |
New Zealand | 24 | 23 | 1 | |
Pakistan | 20 | 20 | 0 | |
South Africa | 29 | 28 | 1 | |
Sri Lanka | 40 | 37 | 3 | |
West Indies | 14 | 13 | 1 | |
Zimbabwe | 22 | 17 | 5 | |
Afghanistan | 33 | 8 | 15 | 10 |
Ireland | 24 | 3 | 9 | 12 |
Scotland | 25 | 4 | 10 | 11 |
UAE | 26 | 3 | 12 | 11 |
Canada | 11 | 0 | 7 | 4 |
Kenya | 15 | 0 | 8 | 7 |
Netherlands | 8 | 0 | 8 | 0 |
Nepal | 18 | 0 | 18 | 0 |
USA | 7 | 0 | 7 | 0 |
Hong Kong | 7 | 0 | 7 | 0 |
Papua New Guinea | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
We can immediately see that the Test nations rarely ever play against the associate nations. Indeed most of the matches played between Test and associate nations have been played in this World Cup or in warm-up matches.
Test nations play around 20–30 one day games per year, with West Indies playing surprisingly few games and Sri Lanka playing by far the most.
Looking at the associate nations, we can see that the four countries playing in the current World Cup also play 20–30 One Day games per year. They have all played at least three games against Test nations and have also played a large number of ‘other’ games.
The third group of countries play less often with Netherlands, a previously strong ‘associate team, only playing eight games.
It is obvious that the stronger associate teams play more matches and against better quality opposition so the theory that associate teams need more experience to improve definitely holds water. They are stronger for the experience of playing better quality opposition but also, I believe, significantly stronger for the ‘other’ or tour games they have been able to play.
What makes it possible for these teams to play more often? Proximity and money.
Proximity to other countries is the biggest factor. Ireland and Scotland are next door to one another so can play each other more regularly. They are also next door to England and can play against England relatively easily too.
Further, it is a quick and logistically easy diversion for teams playing England to hop across and play a couple of friendly games against both Ireland and Scotland while on tour.
Kenya and Namibia also enjoy close proximity to South Africa and Zimbabwe, making tours and tour games easier.
For Afghanistan and the UAE, they are near neighbours to Pakistan and India, giving them similar advantages to Ireland and Scotland. With Pakistan currently playing all of their home matches in the UAE this should also grow the game in that region. However, Afghanistan has security and logistical issues to deal with. Money is the other big factor.
The governing body of each country needs money to finance the game domestically and to hold tours. In wealthier countries such as UAE, Ireland and Scotland, this is less of a problem.
They have quality cricket being played at home or nearby, growing the public’s interest in the game. Touring would be less expensive. The other countries it would seem need much more of a helping hand from the ICC.
The players in associate countries are often amateurs and need to take time off work in order to play and tour. In wealthier countries, this would again be less of a problem.
So what conclusions do I draw from this?
1) Associate teams need to play more often and against better quality opposition in order to improve.
2) Tours to other countries, or visits by other touring Test nations, are vital to grow the game’s popularity and provide better playing experience.
3) Tours to England should have mandatory components of two to three matches in Ireland and two to three in Scotland. South Africa tours should include two to three games in Namibia and Kenya. India tours should include two to three games in Nepal.
4) The money, drive and long-term vision must be provided by the ICC for points 1,2 and 3 to be possible.
Over to you Roarers. What conclusions can you draw?
Andy_Roo
Roar Guru
Canada and USA could be included in tours to West Indies. PNG could be included in tours to AUS. A couple of games against each of those countries as part of the tour.
Snickometero
Guest
Canada doesn't have anything even slightly resembling a "very strong cricket community". There is a very strong West Indian population that has really left Cricket behind. (Especially the black diaspora.) Even with a large proportion of Indians, Sri Lankans, Pakistanis, etc. Outside of older males who are detached & isolated from the general population, the sport is just not present. I'm curious. What made you think that?
Bobbo7
Guest
The top 8 all have A squads who could play the associates more. The ICC should also build the associates better facilities to support the growth of the game. They sell the TV rights for a fortune, surely they could spare a few million to invest properly in the smaller nations
Mark Smith
Guest
So how does cricket in Canada develop? Its not really close to any test team geographically, but is a 1st world country with very strong cricket community, which probably means, long term, if given the same opportunities, could develop better than any other associate nation due to population and economy.
Andy_Roo
Roar Guru
The $2 Billion figure is what the ICC sold the broadcast rights for the 201WC for. For comparison the 2011 WC rights were worth $1.1 Billion and the ICC made $321 Million from the tournament and an annual surplus in 2011 of $230 Million approximately. In 2013 the ICC made a surplus of US$67 Million. (If I have the correct figures If we assumed the ICC will make a surplus of $300 Million this year (being a World Cup Year) that seems to indicate a large amount of money able to be re-invested into the development of the Associate countries.
Working Class Rugger
Roar Guru
That's why I said "supposedly" I don't think its right either.
Andy_Roo
Roar Guru
$2 Billion doesn't sound right at all WCR
Working Class Rugger
Guest
Cricket won't die because of the inability of nations to play Test Cricket. Test Cricket is the traditionalist favourite. You have to be raised on it or else it looks somewhat bewildering to those that are viewing from the outside looking in. What may do it irrevocable damage is self interest. The ICC will supposedly see a $2billion windfall from this years CWC. That's a a hell of a financial war chest to really grow the game. Imagine what could be achieved if they chose 5 nations to really invest in over the next 4 years. Half that windfall would massively expand the current competitive playing field. But we won't see that.
sheek
Roar Guru
RobC, I would prefer an 'A' CWC & a 'B' CWC, each of 8 teams. It could be held con-currently within the same country to save costs. The ICC has a lot of problems, not least it's vacuousness. The West Indies might cease to exist within the next 10 years. Even England, the founder of the game, are descending to 'B' status rapidly. The game is under severe stress in a lot of countries. Test cricket might die simply because fewer and fewer countries are capable of playing five day tests. It's a pretty gloomy outlook going forward.
peeeko
Roar Guru
just shorten the tournament, more games in less days.
Stan McCan
Guest
Not enough money in it for the big 3 to be interested unfortunately