The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Opinion

Cricket World Cup fans, you must maintain your rage!

The Appila Kid new author
Roar Rookie
16th June, 2020
Advertisement
Autoplay in... 6 (Cancel)
Up Next No more videos! Playlist is empty -
Replay
Cancel
Next
The Appila Kid new author
Roar Rookie
16th June, 2020
26

It has been said that cricket got lucky in March.

The Women’s World T20 final was completed in front of a record crowd a mere week before COVID-19 restrictions came into place, which followed a magnificent Australian winter, which not only saw Australia retain the Ashes in England, but also saw a magnificent World Cup culminating in a final that will be spoken about for decades to come.

Cricket certainly got lucky in that the 2019 World Cup was a good one, but don’t let that lead you to look away from the fuller picture.

As a sporting competition, it was fundamentally flawed, with its major flaw in full view.

For the first time in World Cup history, all competing nations were Test nations and, for the first time, some Test nations were excluded. Associate members found themselves left out from the main competition altogether.

Go through the history of the competition and you’ll see that East Africa and Sri Lanka were on the stage in the event’s first run, Sri Lanka and Canada in 1979, and then Zimbabwe in three successive competitions before they were elevated to Test status, in late 1992.

The World Cup proudly expanded from 1996 when Kenya, the UAE and the Netherlands took their place. Between 1999 and 2015, Ireland, Afghanistan, Scotland, Namibia and even Bermuda got a chance to show their wares to the wider cricketing world.

Advertisement

Ireland is now a Test-playing country, and Zimbabwe (whatever the rights and wrongs of the fact) still is, but 12 doesn’t go into ten, so they were instructed to politely wait in the lunchroom while the big boys were allowed to play on the oval.

Mark Adair.

Mark Adair of Ireland. (Photo By Seb Daly/Sportsfile via Getty Images)

Why did the 2019 tournament only entertain the notion of ten competing nations? So that nine games involving India would be played, guaranteeing high broadcast revenues from games beamed into the world’s most populous democracy.

Good luck to them but it’s no justification for shrinking opportunities for participation in the game’s biggest showcase event.

Theoretically, the 2023 World Cup will be blessed with better opportunities for deserving teams, but the qualification pathways in the lower leagues remain geared toward a ten-team event. The ICC retains the power to change those pathways but that would require the rich countries to vote to change it, which they won’t unless forced by extraordinary events – and I can’t see COVID-19 touching it.

It’s a sad reality, because players from associate nations are enjoying more profile than ever before. We have a Nepalese player in the Big Bash, and the world’s best T20 player is from a country who played their first Test less than two years ago. Afghanistan’s first World Cup was only 2015, whereas Ireland only debuted on the world stage in 2007.

Ryan ten Doeschate, although born in South Africa, really came to prominence as a player for the Netherlands and was a member of two IPL winning franchises. Would he have made that splash had his performances in Dutch orange not occurred? An aspiring cricketer’s opportunity to play in a World Cup is initially governed by their birthplace (or, in ten Doeschate’s case, his parents). For all we know, as we read this the world’s best bowler in 2025 might be learning his skill in Uganda, so he has no chance of playing in the 2027 World Cup if we continue to block all but ten nations.

Advertisement

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it many more times: Kenya beat three Test-playing nations on their way to a World Cup semi-final in 2003. Yes, forfeits helped, but you can only beat who you’re playing against, and they developed some kind of a short-term habit.

Subsequent years revealed significant internal administration issues but in the same breath, imagine how the game might have grown in Kenya if, following 2003, they got eight games a year against world-class opposition? Steve Tikolo deserved more opportunities to show his skill and world cricket should have provided him that opportunity. At least the World Cup formats of the time provided him with that stage every four years.

When the plan for a ten-team 2019 World Cup was first announced, the cricket world was almost unanimous that the event should be about expanding the game, not contracting it. “Why would you take the world out of the World Cup?” seemed to be the prevailing attitude.

But, as with most things these days, it all comes down to India. Their early exit from the 2007 event seems to be a precedent that must never be repeated. Never mind that they were booted out of the comp because they weren’t good enough to beat Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, it seems that they just should have been allowed to automatically get past the preliminary stages, and world cricket has been paying for this ever since.

Would the AFL change the whole fundamental approach of its season if Collingwood said, “Hang on, we’re not winning enough with this set up”? Would the English Premier League change its fixture to guarantee Manchester United wins?

One often-overlooked fact is the regularity with which associate nations defeated full member nations in World Cups past. Sri Lanka beat India in 1979, Zimbabwe beat us in 1983 and then again beat England in 1992, Kenya beat the West Indies in 1996, Bangladesh beat Pakistan in 1999, Canada beat Bangladesh in 2003 in the same tournament that saw Kenya beat three Test-playing nations, Ireland beat Pakistan and tied with Zimbabwe in 2007 and then again beat the West Indies in 2015.

Granted, not every associate nation has been magnificent on every occasion but there have been plenty of highlights.

Advertisement
Ireland's captain William Porterfield after scoring a century

Ireland’s captain William Porterfield after scoring a century against Pakistan. (AP Photo/James Elsby)

This is not to be dismissed lightly – the upsets make these competitions fascinating!

If New Zealand beat Sri Lanka in a group game in Cardiff on a cloudy afternoon, it will have some bearing on the ultimate shape of the competition, but it’s not likely to make you sit up. But if Afghanistan beats India, which almost happened last year, then we all take notice. The upsets provide so much of the colour.

Sadly, this doesn’t mean anything to the powers of the game.

Over the psat 20 years, the ICC has taken admirable steps in improving the game, the Intercontinental Cup being the pinnacle. Watching Nigeria play in last year’s World T20 qualifying competition was really pleasing, while Thailand brought a spirit of joy to this year’s women’s World T20 in their first appearance.

Of course, there’s always more that can be done, but they should be commended at least in general for the steps that have been taken. But the issue is, the powerful want to become more powerful, and those who don’t enjoy that level of power can stay where they are, thanks very much.

Consider, for example, where the World Cups are being held. South Africa hosted in 2003, and the West Indies (awful as it was) in 2007. In those days, the ICC spoke about a kind of rotational policy with regard to the hosting. Since then, India hosted in 2011, Australi and New Zealand in 2015, England last year, and – guess what? – India has it again in 2023.

Advertisement

The game is fading in South Africa and the West Indies, both former powerhouses, but it seems unlikely they’ll get a shot at hosting in 2027, while Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh or any of the other full member nations hosting it is fanciful.

The big three look like they’ll just keep getting bigger as the field of competitors keeps narrowing.

Sports opinion delivered daily 

   

Afghanistan is playing Test cricket these days – they didn’t even qualify for the 2011 World Cup. If cricket just wants the international landscape to be three teams, then there’s no guarantee that fans will stick around in the numbers that the game currently enjoys. Perhaps they will in India, but Australian and English crowds, while demanding quality, also demand some variety. Quite why an international sport’s governing body would want to minimise the opportunities to provide that is beyond me.

Cricket World Cup fans, we were incensed when the ten-team plan was first announced. Maintain your rage, people. Maintain your rage.

close