With the 2015 Rugby World Cup in full swing, some on The Roar have been talking about the next Cricket World Cup and the decision of the ICC to decrease the number of teams to eight.
I couldn’t help but wonder why they would do such a thing, as it reduces the exposure for a number of upcoming teams.
Well, like most things in life, it probably comes down to money. Money is made in cricket through advertising and broadcasting rights, and to get the big bucks in both those areas, you need a large audience and supporter base.
And therein lies the problem. The established top 10 countries in world cricket already have a far larger population on which to build a supporter base than the top 10 countries in world rugby. This is mainly due to the huge populations of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
| Top 10 rugby population | Top 10 cricket population |
| 1 England 53,012,456 | India 1,299,499,000 |
| 2 France 67,087,000 | Pakistan 191,785,000 |
| 3 Australia 23,792,000 | Bangladesh 158,762,000 |
| 4 Italy 60,725,000 | Sri Lanka 20,869,000 |
| 5 South Africa 54,957,000 | England and Wales 56,075,912 |
| 6 Argentina 43,466,000 | Australia 23,792,000 |
| 7 New Zealand 4,579,000 | South Africa 54,957,000 |
| 8 Wales 3,063,456 | New Zealand 4,579,000 |
| 9 Scotland 5,295,000 | West Indies 6,560,000 |
| 10 Ireland 6,300,000 | Zimbabwe 13,061,239 |
| Total 322,276,912 | Total 1,829,940,151 |
Then when you look at the next 10 in rugby – all of which were included in the current world cup – compared to the next 10 in cricket, you can immediately see why the IRB are interested in expanding, while the ICC has little interest in doing so.
| Next 10 in rugby | Next 10 in cricket |
| 1 Japan 126,832,000 | Ireland 6,300,000 |
| 2 USA 322,001,000 | Netherlands 16,923,600 |
| 3 Canada 35,851,774 | Scotland 5,295,000 |
| 4 Romania 19,942,642 | Afghanistan 26,023,100 |
| 5 Georgia 3,729,500 | Hong Kong 7,298,600 |
| 6 Uruguay 3,415,866 | UAE 9,157,000 |
| 7 Tonga 103,252 | Papua New Guinea 8,219,000 |
| 8 Fiji 867,000 | Namibia 2,281,000 |
| 9 Samoa 193,000 | Nepal 28,037,904 |
| 10 Namibia 2,281,000 | Kenya 46,050,000 |
| Total 515,217,034 | Total 155,585,204 |
The largest potential markets in the next 10 countries for cricket are in Kenya, Nepal and Afghanistan. Afghanistan is not a place anyone is likely to make much money in the next few years and the economy of Nepal is hardly dynamic.
Kenya could be seen as having a huge potential for making money, but governance issues in the cricket administration is holding it back.
Compare those to the potential growth markets for rugby of Japan, USA, Canada and even Romania. All are countries have far better economic prospects than the above mentioned cricketing nations. It is no coincidence the next Rugby World Cup will be held in Japan.
So while we true cricket fans, who just want to share our love of the game with as many people across the world, lament the lack of vision of the ICC and complement the IRB in their obvious passion for their game in spreading it to the corners of the globe, let us pause and reflect.
The IRB, like the ICC, is most likely simply acting with dollar signs in their eyes.
NOSFARATU
Guest
So basically, ICC needs to start advertising Cricket in Japan,China,South Korea right!? RIGHT!? Nepal,Afghanistan&Kenya are all poorer than India itself, they probably don't give a damn about cricket if they're more worried about getting food.
Nick Nack
Guest
China will eventually absorb these islands for their naval bases.
Brendon
Guest
Cricket will never be an Olympic sport. Firstly the BCCI arent interested and they run cricket. Secondly host nations dont want to spend millions developing a cricket venue then never have it used again. Lets say cricket was at next years Rio games. Do you think Brazilians would care about cricket after the Olympics? Unless the ICC oversaw and subsidised the cricket venues cricket is impossible at the Olympics. Remember when cricket was at the 1998 Malaysian Commonwealth games? The matches were not classified as internationals because the pitch was just matting and not a proper pitch.
Brendon
Guest
Yet rugby fans wet themselves in joy over 25 million people in Japan watched rugby. Guess how many people in India watched the 2011 cricket world final? Hint: a lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot more than a paltry 25 million. The amount of people who watch rugby worldwide compared to cricket is minuscule.
Brendon
Guest
Rugby is a niche game even with NSW,ACT and QLD. Only time it gets any nationwide attention is the world cup. Soccer and basketball in Australia have gone through problems much bigger than crickets problems. Cricket is still the biggest sport in the West Indies despite the problems of the national team. The money of T20 is a big lure considering how few people from West Indian countries play in the NBA or MLB. By Jamaican standards Chris Gayle is a very wealthy person. The only reason winning the RWC is a bigger accomplishment in Australia than winning the cricket world cup is because rugby is such a small sport in Australia compared to cricket. If you go to places like Adelaide people don't even know the difference between league and union yet cricket is the no.2 sport there and very well supported. Compare how many people play cricket to rugby in Australia. Hundreds of thousands more people play cricket. If rugby was played as much and as wide in Australia as cricket then we would dominate cricket like the USA dominates basketball. We can't even sell out ANZ stadium for bledisloe cup matches now.
Brendon
Guest
By this argument the All Blacks are not an important team because of the small population of New Zealand yet more people in the UK and France will watch and attend an England vs New Zealand or France vs New Zealand match than if Argentina was playing. Having countries competitive and good at a sport makes for more interest in matches. When the West Indies were the best in the 80's more people in Australia were a LOT more interested in matches involving Australia vs the West Indies than India. More competitive teams more interest in match in the big markets like England and India and Australia. Same with rugby. More good sides for England and France means more interest in matches in the two dominant rugby markets.
Joey Johns
Roar Guru
Rugby World Cup is the 3rd largest sporting event in the world. It's pretty obvious what 1 & 2 are.
Andy Hill
Roar Pro
Honestly Ash, I tried my best to figure out which countries were ranked 11 to 20 based on Associate and Affiliate tournaments and qualification for world cups etc. It wasn't easy to do given the ICC stops ranking teams outside of the official test, ODI and T20I teams. You may have a valid argument for Canada as they have played in major tournaments but I think USA are a way behind the others mentioned. The fact both of these teams (like UAE and Hong Kong) have a strong first or second generation migrant player and supporter base is actually I think against their favour in terms of potential revenue streams. Until a sport becomes popular in the mainstream it will remain a niche sport with little potential for growth.
josh
Roar Rookie
They both have a very high sub continent expat community too.
Ash
Guest
Don't know why you have left out Canada & USA from cricket's next top 10 list. Both of them are at the same level as most of the 10 countries that you have mentioned in the list.
Ash
Guest
ICC have finally come around to T20 cricket in the Olympics ! T20 will most likely be included in the 2024 Olympics ICC CEO Dave Richardson to Meet IOC Officials to Discuss Cricket in Olympics http://sports.ndtv.com/cricket/news/250052-icc-ceo-dave-richardson-to-meet-ioc-officials-to-discuss-cricket-in-olympics
Andy Hill
Roar Pro
Camo, I think your mention of the Olympics is hugely relevant and something that I missed in the analysis. Rugby is receiving a lot of interest these days-particularly 7's- because it is potentially an olympic sport. Nations like China and Russia invest much more in the development of olympic sports so if cricket could become an olympic sport, they could open up some other large markets.
Bobb7
Guest
Basketball and rugby have a better followed WCs? Is this a fact, I would, be surprised. Are we talking game day attendances or TV?
Andy
Guest
Its a shame but most things are geared towards the interest of full members. We care about how it relates to cricket because we are no longer super relevant in it but i dont see the big difference between how the ICC runs cricket and how the UN functions or unions everywhere. Obviously neither of those other examples are run wonderfully but it just feels like our complaining about cricket is mainly because we are not one of the big boys.
Camo McD
Roar Guru
It's a pity because of the way it is structured that the ICC is effectively operated by and for the interest of it's full members - now even more so geared towards the big 3 on the exec. If it were an independent body operating in the interest of the game of cricket these nations would stand more of a chance of inclusion. It's a very interesting point regarding the populations of the next tier of nations and I reckon you're right, this could be a factor with the ICC. Interestingly Canada has played in a few World Cups although they are not very strong at the moment. The USA has played ODIs too. I understand there are quite a large number of cricket fans there - mainly expats but I'm certain if they had a competent administration they could produce a reasonable team and develop a decent niche following. I think the ICC should have started playing internationals in China a decade ago to start developing some awareness of the sport but I read recently they only contribute about $30k pa to China which is laughable. T20 at the Olympics should be a no brainer as it would provide a forum for many of these countries on a big stage and possible government funding but is opposed by the ICC I suspect because it would mean them relinquishing some control. Interestingly the Windies have one of the smallest populations but dominated the game for 20 years. In that time all the other boards were desperate for them to tour because their own larger populations wanted to see them play so a small population is not necessarily a barrier to a huge amount of interest amongst cricket fans globally.
Andy Hill
Roar Pro
A great point well made CD. Unfortunately, this argument is not relevant to India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, that have very little competition from other sports for the internal market share.
CD
Guest
Although it may be comforting to remember the huge numbers of fans that cricket has, we cannot rest on our laurels with regards to expansion. Cricket above all other major sports relies on international games as its highest profile platform. This may change long term with domestic 20/20 leagues but for the moment it is international series/tournaments. The issue is that other sports are expanding and growing their international competitions - namely in the form of World Cups very effectively. The rugby WC is an excellent example of expansion success. The expansion increases relevance not only in the expansion/minnow countries but ALSO in the established countries. Ie the Rugby WC is important to NZ/SA/AUS not only due to the sports popularity domestically but also that the tournament itself is made more prestigous by its following in a large range of countries. Cricket cannot rely on domestic popularity forever in the established countries. Soccer, basketball and increasingly rugby have better organised and better followed WCs and far better vision for growth. These other WCs will put pressure on the cricket WC in our big three countries... Aus winning the Rugby WC of 20 teams (24 next edition maybe) will seem a much bigger achievement than Aus winning the next Cricket WC in England of 10 teams. So not expanding the game actually makes it harder for cricket to maintain its place in the big cricketing countries. Not to mention the lesser countries such as NZ, SA, WI which are all already feeling the squeeze from other sports. In 20 yrs people in established cricket countires will prefer to win rugby or basketball WCs over the cricket WC as it will seem irrelevant and pathetic with only 10 teams.
Sideline Comm.
Guest
"Samoa, Fiji and Tonga... will ultimately fade away due to those populations relocating to NZ/Australia." That's a loaded statement, haha. Global Warming? Economic collapse?
josh
Roar Rookie
Others have noted. I'd suggest the revenue stream is so good from the top 3 cricketing nations, they don't need to look elsewhere. The Top 3 know this and held the ICC ransom (sightly sensationalised). From a competition view, it would be great to have a truly international game. But that won't happen
spruce moose
Guest
Gee, I hardly think the IRB have their eyes on any of the countries listed below Canada. Samoa, Fiji and Tonga are good at rugby but will ultimately fade away due to those populations relocating to NZ/Australia. Bottom line is that rugby is grateful it has 11/12 countries with which they can form a competitive world cup, and then have 8 others to make up the numbers. They aren't interested in expansion. There is no viable avenue for it. Same with cricket.