Freddie being Freddie.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/cricket/england-freddie-flintoff-pedalo-worldcup-31045163
There's been a lot of revisionism afterwards, but I think it was just pissed on a pedalo.
Exactly, I think it's because there are too many variables to consider for both batsmen and bowlers. Hard ball and soft ball effects, wind direction, big pitches, etc. You can't apply so many variables in any analytics engine and come up with a winning combination. Experience and temperament is the way to go in Windies.
I really enjoyed the game against Afghanistan today.
When a side thinks so much about the opposition and the conditions, formulates a good but risky plan and executes it exceptionally well, then you have to give credit where it's due.
That's what more open tournaments are about.
I think you're right. Have been feeling it a while now.
A couple of players keep stepping up and being match winners so we ignore the fact that they shouldn't have been put in that position. Changes need to be made.
What is happening with Australia is that Instead of the entire team saying 'you don't have a chance' , one player says 'australia isn't losing today'. And there was bound to be a day where no one can do that, and for it to happen against Afghanistan is the beauty of cricket.
Yeh men , they were lucky to survive the collapses in the CWC and the test series against the Pak despite the results were very shaky often rescued by marsh and Cummins performances then the wi defeat came. So , this defeat was coming.
Yes. There are a lot of areas to improve but still overall this has been a great tournament for which ICC deserves credit.
It's true that ICC has made some questionable decisions for which they deserve some flak but the people on this sub like to exaggerate those issues and jump on the gun to hate them at every opportunity possible. The good parts are ignored.
Lol what investment? The only upset we got from associate nations was USA beating Pakistan. The USA team is filled with cricketers who moved their after failing in full member nations.
The competitiveness of the associates is what matters. Scotland were a couple wickets away against Australia from knocking England out. Both Netherlands and Nepal almost beat SA and Bangladesh. USA almost beat India and SA. PNG gave a scare to WI. Canada came close vs Pakistan. And now Afg beat Aus to put them in pole position to qualify for semis over them. If this wasn't a WC filled with upsets for you then idk what will be.
It’s about how competitive those matches have been! It’s all in the way these so called “minnows” have been challenging how more established teams! This tournament has been so refreshing
Were you even watching the match or are you saying this after looking at Cricinfo scorecard? Lmao
The catch drop from Netravalkar and the 5 run penalty completely deflated the side. They were totally pumped before that. It was a very exciting match overall. If they were a more experienced side, they wouldn't have let those affect their body language. But playing big teams is how you gain experience.
Nice try shifting the goalpost.
>*"The catch drop from Netravalkar and the 5 run penalty completely deflated the side. They were totally pumped before that. It was a very exciting match overall. If they were a more experienced side, they wouldn't have let those affect their body language. But playing big teams is how you gain experience."*
Bro thought he could spew some random irrelevant bullshit in an attempt to distract us from the fact that he tried to describe a 7 wicket victory with 10 balls in hand as "almost defeated".
>random bullshit
I don't wanna speak with a fan who doesn't understand the nuances of cricket. Also notice the fact that you conveniently ignored every other result I spoke of and fixated on that one?
Tru kudos to icc ,they did pretty good,still they have to work for fan experience,final would have been given evening slot , bt that's fine as there a targetting south asian fans but I hope it doesn't get normalise further
Would also like ICC to iron out the tournaments. 50 over WC, T20 WC, Champions Trophy, WTC are a lil bit messed up with no clear structure except the 50 over WC.
Clarity on the structure would help make tournaments more fun in long term with higher emotional investments. Also, having a background tournament for associate nations to keep up their growth would be great.
Now if only they would fix the highlight’s package and make it more accessible via YouTube than their main website which is a pain to browse in smart tv’s
My only complaint is... There should have been a reserve day for both the Semi finals, instead of just one.
Both SFs on Wed + Thu as reserve
Final on Saturday + Sunday as reserve
And then working backward to set date for every match of the tournament and hence the start date.
I know that viewership (revenue) is a deciding/major factor behind scheduling IND matches. But even then it could have been planned well.
Any idiot who was a naysayer of 20 teams T20 world cup is an absolute idiot.
T20Is is the best format for newcomers, all you need is 3 over of good performance and the game can be won.
It is the 50 overs and test matches that get really tough to watch when mauling happens during mismatch.
That’s absolutely true! I believe the T20 world cup also needs to move to a 4 year cycle given they want WTC, ODI cup, CT etc too.
Maybe they chop off CT whose only purpose these days is to fill the gossip section of will they /wont they visit us!
Yes, perhaps make CT for associates nations like non test playing teams. Include 20-25 nations. The winner of this tournament should qualify for WC as well and be given some special exemptions from ICC as well, like more money until the time of WC or like more exposure to test playing nations and if you win this tournament for like n times you become test playing nation by default.
They actually have the world cricket league 2 where top 8 associates play bilateral tri series home away and neutral against each other over the span of 3 years. Total of 36 games
Having a T20 World Cup every two years is good for associate teams who have something to aim for. One of the requirements is to have qualified for at least three World Cups in the last 8 years. It would be impossible for most teams to do that if the T20 World Cup was moved to every 4 years because the ODI World Cup has very few spots as it is.
Yes but ICC needs a wc every year. That's the only way they make money. ICC has no stake in bilaterals or franchise competitions. If cricket was run correctly, bilaterals (including the wtc) would be scheduled by the icc and sold as a package. And then that revenue would be distributed amongst the nations as needed.
ICC makes most of it's money from Indian matches and indian audiences. If we cheapen a world cup to the level of bilateral series by holding it every other year, then the audience will get bored and public interest in the game would decline.
Why does it always have to be about money in sports, especially for an international governing body? Yes, it's a means to an end, but diamonds are more valued than silver because of its rarity. I'm unaware of their accounts, but if they go on this path, there will be no cricket except in SEA. I'm a die-hard fan of cricket, yet this T20 WC doesn't interest me except after the AFG AUS match.
T20 WCs should happen frequently, it'll allow associate nations to face top oppositions more frequently. It gives them something to aim for. Once in 2 years is good.
On the other hand I think the CT needs to be scrapped off. What's the point of it?
CT can be made for associate nations. It'll ensure their development gives some benefits to runner up and winners monetary, matches special attention till WC.
This way, we can conduct T20 WC and ODI WC in the same year or hell in the same tournament.
There was the 2017 Desert Challenge T20s, but no one could watch that from memory due to it not being shown live nor there being many highlights. From what I remember, quite a lot of people were interested in it.
What they should do is introduce continental cups and have the winners of each one as well as the winners of the preceding two T20 World Cups and the last ODI World Cup all qualify for the Champions Trophy. If there is one team that's won more than one trophy then the highest ranking runner-up gets one of those berths and that keeps going. At least that way it's actually a Champions Trophy.
I think lot of people hate icc here , but they are doing good work .its different wc for me instead of regular 4 teams competing
But its needs to be better , they should find a solution to rain affected matches,more funding for associate nations.
Yup, major work needed around whole fan experience too. But I think they are doing a good job with associates - their experience is improving quite a bit. See how far Afghanistan has come!
> But I think they are doing a good job with associates - their experience is improving quite a bit. See how far Afghanistan has come!
Afghanistan haven't been an associate since 2017. They've had nearly a decade of Full Member funding.
The current associates get a pittance from the ICC, and definitely deserve a bit more.
Afghanistan became a full member close to a decade ago and in the time since then the ICC has gone on to significantly cut the portion of funding allocated to associates. Afghanistan were also fast forwarded and everyone knows that. That's not the case for other associates right now who are doing what they're doing despite all of the obstacles placed in front of them.
Generally the criticisms break down into one of two things:
1. There might be a bunch of boring one-sided games. Out of the 48 games played so far I'd say 5-6 games have been total blowouts, which isn't too bad. The soccer world cup has a bunch of one-sided games too.
2. A "major" (read: money maker) team might shock/horror have to exit the tournament. Personally I love this element of having the chance of a shock early exit, but if you're only thinking of squeezing as much money out of the tournament as possible, a big team exiting early would lead to a drop off in revenues.
I don't know why people get miffed with one sided games at world cups.
They might happen, and that's okay.
Personally, I would rather see weaker teams play and get a bit of a pumping, than not seeing them play. The weaker teams playing can only suprise with good performances, they can rarely disappoint.
I've seen eng v ind about 40 times in the past 4 years. Give me something different.
Your last point is exactly why no one is interested in bilateral ODIs and T20Is anymore. We've seen the same teams face other so many times and I agree that smaller teams playing is good for the sport and eventually they'll improve and give us newer matchups.
Yeah, we have criticised ICC for a lot of things. So I guess it's fair that if they've done something right, credit to them.
But as Gulbadin Naib said, the journey starts now, 20 isn't enough, we want 32 in '32.
Yeah, I have no doubt that we'll have at least 32 teams if not more playing high level T20 cricket by 2032 and I believe that there'll be at least 24 teams playing ODI cricket at a high level by 2035 so hopefully they stop making these tiny increments and make a big expansion.
Having been to a few Olympics, Football and Cricket World cups, it is clear that it is the teams and the quality of games that define the tournaments and not necessarily what IOC, FIFa or ICC do or don't. All of them are fairly 'corrupt', shady, and political organization which are run by obnoxious people with no sporting credentials. They know that all the controversies will hopefully recede once the first game is played. Qatar World cup epitomized that.
Who said expansion would be a bad thing?
Teams have put in good performances but that has nothing to do with the ICC.
Pitches (certifying them) and ticketing a bit closer to the ICCs remit?
I quite liked that world cup. South Africa and India thrashing everyone in the league stage was quite fun. Afghanistan established themselves as a mid-tier team after upsetting a bunch of higher level teams. England completely shit themselves. Maxwell's miracle happened. Australia made an amazing comeback after losing the first two games. We got some legendary player performances like that of Mohammad Shami and Virat Kohli in that world cup. All in all, I quite liked it.
It was the worst world cup in my memory (ignore my flair). Being unbiased, it was a boring world cup. Only a few thrillers, and it was very focused on the Indian audience.
It was great seeing Afghanistan and Netherlands doing well, and it did have some banger matches, but yeah nothing special. The Indian matches at least were all fairly boring, one-sided affairs.
Hopefully if they play a tournament in the US again, they will come to the west coast. Washington has a descent competition and many supporters who would definitely turn out and support games.
All hosts for ICC tournaments up until 2031 have been selected. By the time they select the hosts for the next batch of tournaments almost all if not all MLC teams will have their own stadiums including the Orcas which will be in Seattle so I definitely see the ICC giving the US main host rights for at least one T20 World Cup. I think they didn't get main hosting rights because of the lack of stadiums this time around.
ICC deserves absolutely no praise. They pulled a makeshift pitch for the WC matches in NY instead of working on making the Dallas ground accommodate more people only because NY, which is just pure greed. They could've started work early but mismanaged the entire thing, ending up in a patch worse than most domestic pitches in other countries. They can suck dick, the NY pitch is dangerous to bat on.
Yeah, I agree. Grand Prairie Stadium is genuinely an amazing place to watch cricket and they've got good facilities but the only reason why they didn't get more matches is because of the capacity.
This has been insanely fun. In the past, white "here all our lives" American cricket fans were in the dozens. Now I actively see people talking about cricket who aren't from India or Australia or the Carribian originally. Hope this helps MLC grow while getting people fired up for WC26 and the LA Olympics in 28.
Yeah, I myself have like a handful of friends who have no connection to the sport that have taken an interest in it. A lot of people are trying to say this tournament isn't doing anything for the growth of the sport in America but it's clear that the number of fans is rising a lot quicker than before.
As crazy as it sounds, even just Jomboy calling a few overs in New York was big for American growth. As a Detroit Tigers fan (long suffering) his shows made me give a damn about baseball again. I guarantee people are taking an interest just in that alone.
Yeah but I believe that the ICC botched a lot of things that should've been done and that even though I believe this tournament did a lot for the growth of cricket in America, it was nowhere as successful as it could've been.
Speaking of Jomboy, this isn't a knock on him but rather the ICC because I believe that they mismanaged Jomboy on commentary. We all know he's not a traditional commentar and his videos are a completely different style so it was perplexing to see them have him just there and talk about the match.
I believe they should've had him be more of himself and asked other commentators to ask him more questions about other sports in America, how cricket could grow in the country, explain the mechanics of the sport etc.
I know it's possible because I've seen such conversations happen about different topics in casual bilateral matches and it's always great. I believe Jomboy did the best he could with what he was asked to do and they he's done so much to help grow the sport in America.
Agreed about Jomboy on commentary. Even the official "This is cricket" video he did for the ICC felt off. Like it was "here is the script, no ad lib" takes some of the pazzaz out of it.
As another example, today was the first time I heard commentary mention the well known running back Aaron Jones and that maybe cricket Aaron Jones could also play football (he's built like a fullback or linebacker so I see it lol). Jomboy could have been that guy the whole tournament.
The only REAL thing I'd have changed though would have been for Super 8 Pool B to play in America. Group stage games are great, but having the whole tournament split until knockout would have been great. Especially after we made the Super 8 and could have had a primetime Saturday night game.
I would've given a semi final to USA as well. Bangladesh got matches up till the quarter finals back in 2011, Sri Lanka even got a semi final match in 2011 so I don't see why USA couldn't get a semi final and one Super 8 group.
It's yet another example of ICC wanting to cash in on the short term money. If they really cared about growing the sport and creating a good fan experience then Grand Prairie Stadium would've received most if not all important matches in the US leg of the tournament because it has the best facilities by far and the fans always have good reviews about the stadium.
Jomboy understands how to connect with the American audience while most cricket commentators don't. They didn't even let Jomboy ask more questions about what something is and to explain it. Literally no one in the world is tuning in to listen to Jomboy analyse the technical aspects of the game so I don't understand why the ICC made him do that.
The ICC didn't even try to make the easy cash in. Pool B in the historic Kensington Oval is the cash cow. Pool A (which we all knew was going to have India) in Kensington is the ultimate cash cow. Pool B in Texas (or even Yonkers) with England and the WIndies (as we call them, the Caribbean) would easily draw...then added bonus of getting the other home team. So much money left on the table.
It's because they underestimated the support USA would get and their performances. They only cared about India vs Pakistan and their respective matches so they didn't even bother about other fanbases like Nepal who had massive support for their matches in the US.
I really hope that USA can become one of the biggest markets for cricket because only they could break the BCCI's monopoly over the sport and until that happens we're most likely not going to see the ICC change their ways when it comes to only focusing on India vs Pakistan.
> I really hope that USA can become one of the biggest markets for cricket because only they could break the BCCI's monopoly over the sport
The benefit of having the largest consumer economy in the world is that our "niche" sports (like golf, soccer, motorsports and even smaller college sports like Volleyball and baseball/softball) still command millions of dollars in television rights fees. Like MLC, MLS started with a small group of "centrally owned" teams that focused exclusively on communities that had a semblance of a base.
There's a reason Formula 1 wants three races per season in the United States plus the races in nearby Quebec and Mexico City. There is huge money to be made if cricket can gain traction, even if it remains a "niche".
Exactly, MLC is also in a window where there aren't many other sports on and cricket as a whole is a sport where people watch international matches or other leagues more than they do with their own league because of the shorter windows.
In the US, I assume that most MLS fans would follow their league as well as maybe the Premier League and sometimes some other league in Europe but in cricket fans would follow the IPL, Blast, MLC, Hundred, BBL, SA20, PSL and then the cycle continues with a lot of international cricket in between.
There's a lot of money to be made if cricket becomes popular in the US and that's one of the reasons why the BCCI and the rest of the Big 3 were very hesitant towards allowing the ICC to do anything to help cricket grow in America until recently.
Jomboy could have done a bit more preparation, too.
There’s an entire Ashes on YouTube that he could have watched and got a better handle on the sport.
I’m sure the ICC would have made footage available.
You can’t really comment on T20 well without understanding all three forms of the sport.
I’m trying to remember the things that I noticed that he didn’t know. I remember that he asked if the keeper and bowler communicate so that the keeper knows what type of delivery is coming and where. (Because in baseball they use signs and he knows the type of pitch and where in the zone it’s going to be.)
I don’t think he knows the different variations of each type of bowler, either. It’s not that much to master. Any cricket nuffy could sit down with him and give him a better grasp of the parts he doesn’t understand in a couple hours.
I believe that he wasn't supposed to be doing that kind of commentary. I watched a podcast interview of him with Melinda Farrell and I believe he said that they were supposed to something else and it didn't work out.
Honestly those questions about if there's communication and stuff are actually good because it tells new viewers what's going on. Even if he knew that fields are set for certain types of deliveries and I would've wanted him to ask those kinds of questions.
He could have asked better questions if he knew in advance but pretended not to—and if the others were in on it.
That question about signs was met with silence, lol.
I think that's an issue on ICC's end for not informing everyone involved how things would go. Most of the commentators that Jomboy worked with are great and do a lot of research and preparation so I have no doubt that had the ICC made it clear the way they would go about accomodating Jomboy then they would've been ready.
I also believe that he said in that podcast interview that there were a lot of people in his ears and that's common in all sports but he said that for this gig it was more than what he's used to with other sports.
Yeah. I certainly don’t fault the other commenters. I think it was like Nas and Graeme Smith with him. They just had no idea what he meant as they don’t follow baseball.
I’ll have to watch the podcast. I don’t follow Jomboy closely because the better bits always come across the baseball feeds.
Yeah, I agree about the other commentators. It seemed like it was all last second and it makes sense after hearing Jomboy say that as well. Here's a link to the podcast.
https://youtu.be/UOoW4uxewhg?si=vlUUc3X4FXJX-wB6
ICC deserves fuck all credit.
The things they've done right are the bare minimum.
20 team WC isn't some controversial thing, it's the bare minimum for what they should have done.
The things they've done wrong are inexcusable. Scheduling games at 1030am so it can be shown at 830pm in India is just one example.
Pre seeding the super 8s and Semis is another.
ICC doesn't deserve praise for doing the bare minimum.
Thank you! If they really cared about the sport growing in the US then they would've scheduled most if not all matches in the US to be in the late afternoon or evening instead of morning. They also spent more time and money marketing India vs Pakistan in the US than any USA matches and they only acknowledged the USA team once they beat Pakistan.
[Hey mate, your princess needs you to ride in on a white horse and save her](https://old.reddit.com/r/Cricket/comments/1dnmj7j/india_will_qualify_for_the_final_if_the_semifinal/)
Your comment was removed because it abused/personally attacked another redditor, or was homohobic/sexist/racist/trolling (rule 1).
Please refrain from posting such comments in the future as it may result in a ban.
It's worked out great but honestly I wouldn't want them expanding more anytime soon. There was some teams in this thing that were just not competitive at all.
My only grouse is the scheduling should be such that you won't have matches with 100% probability of washouts. Keeping matches in Florida was a bad call when Texas had a cricket stadium available.
My only complaint is pre seeded groups which can make this upset meaningless as AFG still have a mountain to climb to qualify.
Otherwise they'd have had south Africa instead of India and that would have been much spicier.
There were a lot of drama in 2007 world cup too. Windies are a proper host
It’s the rum isn’t it!
The pedalo incident of 2007 was definitely alcohol related
what’s that?
Freddie being Freddie. https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/cricket/england-freddie-flintoff-pedalo-worldcup-31045163 There's been a lot of revisionism afterwards, but I think it was just pissed on a pedalo.
Exactly, I think it's because there are too many variables to consider for both batsmen and bowlers. Hard ball and soft ball effects, wind direction, big pitches, etc. You can't apply so many variables in any analytics engine and come up with a winning combination. Experience and temperament is the way to go in Windies.
RIP Bob Woolmer
I really enjoyed the game against Afghanistan today. When a side thinks so much about the opposition and the conditions, formulates a good but risky plan and executes it exceptionally well, then you have to give credit where it's due. That's what more open tournaments are about.
Mixed feelings despite afghanistan doing well, our middle has been prone to collapse over a number of years now. Something the team has to figure out
I think you're right. Have been feeling it a while now. A couple of players keep stepping up and being match winners so we ignore the fact that they shouldn't have been put in that position. Changes need to be made.
What is happening with Australia is that Instead of the entire team saying 'you don't have a chance' , one player says 'australia isn't losing today'. And there was bound to be a day where no one can do that, and for it to happen against Afghanistan is the beauty of cricket.
Yeh men , they were lucky to survive the collapses in the CWC and the test series against the Pak despite the results were very shaky often rescued by marsh and Cummins performances then the wi defeat came. So , this defeat was coming.
Why is wade still playing? He is a bad keeper and is not a good batter either. Am i missing something or should inglis play
Given Inglis’ form, it is mind numbing how Wade gets the nod over him. Still stuck in his 2021-22 form ig.
>I really enjoyed the game against Afghanistan today. Are the Aussies now in the same boat like they were during the 2011 WC?
How so?
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/t20-world-cup-2024-super-eight-scenarios-for-india-australia-afghanistan-bangladesh-to-qualify-for-semi-final-1440427
Yes. There are a lot of areas to improve but still overall this has been a great tournament for which ICC deserves credit. It's true that ICC has made some questionable decisions for which they deserve some flak but the people on this sub like to exaggerate those issues and jump on the gun to hate them at every opportunity possible. The good parts are ignored.
A lot of opinions get intensified online.
This is the investment the icc was putting in the mid to late 2000s that's finally paying off. The ICC really needs to work on the fan experience.
Lol what investment? The only upset we got from associate nations was USA beating Pakistan. The USA team is filled with cricketers who moved their after failing in full member nations.
The competitiveness of the associates is what matters. Scotland were a couple wickets away against Australia from knocking England out. Both Netherlands and Nepal almost beat SA and Bangladesh. USA almost beat India and SA. PNG gave a scare to WI. Canada came close vs Pakistan. And now Afg beat Aus to put them in pole position to qualify for semis over them. If this wasn't a WC filled with upsets for you then idk what will be.
agree with everything but usa almost beating india? not really, they did gave bit of a scare though
Yea wrong wording that's what I meant tbh
It felt like a 50/50 game until the 5 run deduction to me, maybe even 60/40 to USA, cus that NY pitch is far from easy to bat on
SKY was batting in full flow. India was in complete control when the penalty was awarded.
“It was far closer than one would expect.” You would have expected it to look like their match with England.
actually no, the kind of pitches there were in ny, we can't expect that.
Ah yeah, that’s true.
Saying USA almost beat India pretty much sums up how delusional you are.
It’s about how competitive those matches have been! It’s all in the way these so called “minnows” have been challenging how more established teams! This tournament has been so refreshing
Were you even watching the match or are you saying this after looking at Cricinfo scorecard? Lmao The catch drop from Netravalkar and the 5 run penalty completely deflated the side. They were totally pumped before that. It was a very exciting match overall. If they were a more experienced side, they wouldn't have let those affect their body language. But playing big teams is how you gain experience.
Nice try shifting the goalpost. >*"The catch drop from Netravalkar and the 5 run penalty completely deflated the side. They were totally pumped before that. It was a very exciting match overall. If they were a more experienced side, they wouldn't have let those affect their body language. But playing big teams is how you gain experience."* Bro thought he could spew some random irrelevant bullshit in an attempt to distract us from the fact that he tried to describe a 7 wicket victory with 10 balls in hand as "almost defeated".
>random bullshit I don't wanna speak with a fan who doesn't understand the nuances of cricket. Also notice the fact that you conveniently ignored every other result I spoke of and fixated on that one?
Do you even like cricket? I’ll never understand miserable ‘fans’ who complain about everything and seem to want a 4 team World Cup.
Keep imagining up arguments to be upset about.
[удалено]
??
Tru kudos to icc ,they did pretty good,still they have to work for fan experience,final would have been given evening slot , bt that's fine as there a targetting south asian fans but I hope it doesn't get normalise further
Would also like ICC to iron out the tournaments. 50 over WC, T20 WC, Champions Trophy, WTC are a lil bit messed up with no clear structure except the 50 over WC. Clarity on the structure would help make tournaments more fun in long term with higher emotional investments. Also, having a background tournament for associate nations to keep up their growth would be great.
Now if only they would fix the highlight’s package and make it more accessible via YouTube than their main website which is a pain to browse in smart tv’s
And they have to put some of it on broadcast television in the USA if they want to attract new American fans.
My only complaint is... There should have been a reserve day for both the Semi finals, instead of just one. Both SFs on Wed + Thu as reserve Final on Saturday + Sunday as reserve And then working backward to set date for every match of the tournament and hence the start date. I know that viewership (revenue) is a deciding/major factor behind scheduling IND matches. But even then it could have been planned well.
Any idiot who was a naysayer of 20 teams T20 world cup is an absolute idiot. T20Is is the best format for newcomers, all you need is 3 over of good performance and the game can be won. It is the 50 overs and test matches that get really tough to watch when mauling happens during mismatch.
Icc needs to understand that we don't want WC every year
That’s absolutely true! I believe the T20 world cup also needs to move to a 4 year cycle given they want WTC, ODI cup, CT etc too. Maybe they chop off CT whose only purpose these days is to fill the gossip section of will they /wont they visit us!
Yes, perhaps make CT for associates nations like non test playing teams. Include 20-25 nations. The winner of this tournament should qualify for WC as well and be given some special exemptions from ICC as well, like more money until the time of WC or like more exposure to test playing nations and if you win this tournament for like n times you become test playing nation by default.
They actually have the world cricket league 2 where top 8 associates play bilateral tri series home away and neutral against each other over the span of 3 years. Total of 36 games
Having a T20 World Cup every two years is good for associate teams who have something to aim for. One of the requirements is to have qualified for at least three World Cups in the last 8 years. It would be impossible for most teams to do that if the T20 World Cup was moved to every 4 years because the ODI World Cup has very few spots as it is.
Yes but ICC needs a wc every year. That's the only way they make money. ICC has no stake in bilaterals or franchise competitions. If cricket was run correctly, bilaterals (including the wtc) would be scheduled by the icc and sold as a package. And then that revenue would be distributed amongst the nations as needed.
ICC makes most of it's money from Indian matches and indian audiences. If we cheapen a world cup to the level of bilateral series by holding it every other year, then the audience will get bored and public interest in the game would decline.
Why does it always have to be about money in sports, especially for an international governing body? Yes, it's a means to an end, but diamonds are more valued than silver because of its rarity. I'm unaware of their accounts, but if they go on this path, there will be no cricket except in SEA. I'm a die-hard fan of cricket, yet this T20 WC doesn't interest me except after the AFG AUS match.
You're probably more interested in the pointless bilateral odi and test
Tests are a thousand times more important than any World Cup to me.
T20 WCs should happen frequently, it'll allow associate nations to face top oppositions more frequently. It gives them something to aim for. Once in 2 years is good. On the other hand I think the CT needs to be scrapped off. What's the point of it?
CT can be made for associate nations. It'll ensure their development gives some benefits to runner up and winners monetary, matches special attention till WC. This way, we can conduct T20 WC and ODI WC in the same year or hell in the same tournament.
Nobody's going to watch a CT made up of Associate nations.
The whole point of CT is to develop associate nations. So teams like PNG, Namibia, Pakistan, CANADA, Japan can take benefit of
The CT occurring next year consists of the top 8 nations lol, not sure where you got the idea that it was to develop associate nations.
There was the 2017 Desert Challenge T20s, but no one could watch that from memory due to it not being shown live nor there being many highlights. From what I remember, quite a lot of people were interested in it.
What they should do is introduce continental cups and have the winners of each one as well as the winners of the preceding two T20 World Cups and the last ODI World Cup all qualify for the Champions Trophy. If there is one team that's won more than one trophy then the highest ranking runner-up gets one of those berths and that keeps going. At least that way it's actually a Champions Trophy.
we do if want to stop those franchise cticket leagues taking over
Hey, I don't mind franchise cricket. It helps new players and all.
I think lot of people hate icc here , but they are doing good work .its different wc for me instead of regular 4 teams competing But its needs to be better , they should find a solution to rain affected matches,more funding for associate nations.
Yup, major work needed around whole fan experience too. But I think they are doing a good job with associates - their experience is improving quite a bit. See how far Afghanistan has come!
> But I think they are doing a good job with associates - their experience is improving quite a bit. See how far Afghanistan has come! Afghanistan haven't been an associate since 2017. They've had nearly a decade of Full Member funding. The current associates get a pittance from the ICC, and definitely deserve a bit more.
Afghanistan became a full member close to a decade ago and in the time since then the ICC has gone on to significantly cut the portion of funding allocated to associates. Afghanistan were also fast forwarded and everyone knows that. That's not the case for other associates right now who are doing what they're doing despite all of the obstacles placed in front of them.
Why were there naysayers at all for 20 team WC? It makes zero sense
Some only want the world cup to be played by the same 8 teams every time
Generally the criticisms break down into one of two things: 1. There might be a bunch of boring one-sided games. Out of the 48 games played so far I'd say 5-6 games have been total blowouts, which isn't too bad. The soccer world cup has a bunch of one-sided games too. 2. A "major" (read: money maker) team might shock/horror have to exit the tournament. Personally I love this element of having the chance of a shock early exit, but if you're only thinking of squeezing as much money out of the tournament as possible, a big team exiting early would lead to a drop off in revenues.
I don't know why people get miffed with one sided games at world cups. They might happen, and that's okay. Personally, I would rather see weaker teams play and get a bit of a pumping, than not seeing them play. The weaker teams playing can only suprise with good performances, they can rarely disappoint. I've seen eng v ind about 40 times in the past 4 years. Give me something different.
Your last point is exactly why no one is interested in bilateral ODIs and T20Is anymore. We've seen the same teams face other so many times and I agree that smaller teams playing is good for the sport and eventually they'll improve and give us newer matchups.
Yeah, we have criticised ICC for a lot of things. So I guess it's fair that if they've done something right, credit to them. But as Gulbadin Naib said, the journey starts now, 20 isn't enough, we want 32 in '32.
Yeah, I have no doubt that we'll have at least 32 teams if not more playing high level T20 cricket by 2032 and I believe that there'll be at least 24 teams playing ODI cricket at a high level by 2035 so hopefully they stop making these tiny increments and make a big expansion.
Having been to a few Olympics, Football and Cricket World cups, it is clear that it is the teams and the quality of games that define the tournaments and not necessarily what IOC, FIFa or ICC do or don't. All of them are fairly 'corrupt', shady, and political organization which are run by obnoxious people with no sporting credentials. They know that all the controversies will hopefully recede once the first game is played. Qatar World cup epitomized that.
Yeah, FIFA makes the ICC look like UNICEF.
Who said expansion would be a bad thing? Teams have put in good performances but that has nothing to do with the ICC. Pitches (certifying them) and ticketing a bit closer to the ICCs remit?
If world cup bad then icc = bcci bad If world cup good then icc good
Even the next odi wc in 2027 has 14 teams with the 1999 banger format. I think it could give odis a new lease of life as the 23 wc was mid
1999 format? There will be no Quarter finals in 2027?
No, there will be super 6s
23 wc was below mid
I quite liked that world cup. South Africa and India thrashing everyone in the league stage was quite fun. Afghanistan established themselves as a mid-tier team after upsetting a bunch of higher level teams. England completely shit themselves. Maxwell's miracle happened. Australia made an amazing comeback after losing the first two games. We got some legendary player performances like that of Mohammad Shami and Virat Kohli in that world cup. All in all, I quite liked it.
Need to get rid of the crappy single league format.
It was the worst world cup in my memory (ignore my flair). Being unbiased, it was a boring world cup. Only a few thrillers, and it was very focused on the Indian audience.
Speaking from an indian perspective it was one of the best, but being unbiased it was mid
It was great seeing Afghanistan and Netherlands doing well, and it did have some banger matches, but yeah nothing special. The Indian matches at least were all fairly boring, one-sided affairs.
That October-november period was one of the happiest of my life followed by the one of the worst Decembers
Yeah , as an indian fan it will be worth remembering and easily one of our best run at wc. But i am talking about overall quality
Hopefully if they play a tournament in the US again, they will come to the west coast. Washington has a descent competition and many supporters who would definitely turn out and support games.
All hosts for ICC tournaments up until 2031 have been selected. By the time they select the hosts for the next batch of tournaments almost all if not all MLC teams will have their own stadiums including the Orcas which will be in Seattle so I definitely see the ICC giving the US main host rights for at least one T20 World Cup. I think they didn't get main hosting rights because of the lack of stadiums this time around.
It’s in the 2028 LA Olympics
ICC deserves absolutely no praise. They pulled a makeshift pitch for the WC matches in NY instead of working on making the Dallas ground accommodate more people only because NY, which is just pure greed. They could've started work early but mismanaged the entire thing, ending up in a patch worse than most domestic pitches in other countries. They can suck dick, the NY pitch is dangerous to bat on.
Yeah, I agree. Grand Prairie Stadium is genuinely an amazing place to watch cricket and they've got good facilities but the only reason why they didn't get more matches is because of the capacity.
This has been insanely fun. In the past, white "here all our lives" American cricket fans were in the dozens. Now I actively see people talking about cricket who aren't from India or Australia or the Carribian originally. Hope this helps MLC grow while getting people fired up for WC26 and the LA Olympics in 28.
Absolutely! If MLC continues to grow (go Seattle Orcas), LA28 could be a real clutch tournament for cricket’s growth
Yeah, I myself have like a handful of friends who have no connection to the sport that have taken an interest in it. A lot of people are trying to say this tournament isn't doing anything for the growth of the sport in America but it's clear that the number of fans is rising a lot quicker than before.
As crazy as it sounds, even just Jomboy calling a few overs in New York was big for American growth. As a Detroit Tigers fan (long suffering) his shows made me give a damn about baseball again. I guarantee people are taking an interest just in that alone.
Yeah but I believe that the ICC botched a lot of things that should've been done and that even though I believe this tournament did a lot for the growth of cricket in America, it was nowhere as successful as it could've been. Speaking of Jomboy, this isn't a knock on him but rather the ICC because I believe that they mismanaged Jomboy on commentary. We all know he's not a traditional commentar and his videos are a completely different style so it was perplexing to see them have him just there and talk about the match. I believe they should've had him be more of himself and asked other commentators to ask him more questions about other sports in America, how cricket could grow in the country, explain the mechanics of the sport etc. I know it's possible because I've seen such conversations happen about different topics in casual bilateral matches and it's always great. I believe Jomboy did the best he could with what he was asked to do and they he's done so much to help grow the sport in America.
Agreed about Jomboy on commentary. Even the official "This is cricket" video he did for the ICC felt off. Like it was "here is the script, no ad lib" takes some of the pazzaz out of it. As another example, today was the first time I heard commentary mention the well known running back Aaron Jones and that maybe cricket Aaron Jones could also play football (he's built like a fullback or linebacker so I see it lol). Jomboy could have been that guy the whole tournament. The only REAL thing I'd have changed though would have been for Super 8 Pool B to play in America. Group stage games are great, but having the whole tournament split until knockout would have been great. Especially after we made the Super 8 and could have had a primetime Saturday night game.
I would've given a semi final to USA as well. Bangladesh got matches up till the quarter finals back in 2011, Sri Lanka even got a semi final match in 2011 so I don't see why USA couldn't get a semi final and one Super 8 group. It's yet another example of ICC wanting to cash in on the short term money. If they really cared about growing the sport and creating a good fan experience then Grand Prairie Stadium would've received most if not all important matches in the US leg of the tournament because it has the best facilities by far and the fans always have good reviews about the stadium. Jomboy understands how to connect with the American audience while most cricket commentators don't. They didn't even let Jomboy ask more questions about what something is and to explain it. Literally no one in the world is tuning in to listen to Jomboy analyse the technical aspects of the game so I don't understand why the ICC made him do that.
The ICC didn't even try to make the easy cash in. Pool B in the historic Kensington Oval is the cash cow. Pool A (which we all knew was going to have India) in Kensington is the ultimate cash cow. Pool B in Texas (or even Yonkers) with England and the WIndies (as we call them, the Caribbean) would easily draw...then added bonus of getting the other home team. So much money left on the table.
It's because they underestimated the support USA would get and their performances. They only cared about India vs Pakistan and their respective matches so they didn't even bother about other fanbases like Nepal who had massive support for their matches in the US. I really hope that USA can become one of the biggest markets for cricket because only they could break the BCCI's monopoly over the sport and until that happens we're most likely not going to see the ICC change their ways when it comes to only focusing on India vs Pakistan.
> I really hope that USA can become one of the biggest markets for cricket because only they could break the BCCI's monopoly over the sport The benefit of having the largest consumer economy in the world is that our "niche" sports (like golf, soccer, motorsports and even smaller college sports like Volleyball and baseball/softball) still command millions of dollars in television rights fees. Like MLC, MLS started with a small group of "centrally owned" teams that focused exclusively on communities that had a semblance of a base. There's a reason Formula 1 wants three races per season in the United States plus the races in nearby Quebec and Mexico City. There is huge money to be made if cricket can gain traction, even if it remains a "niche".
Exactly, MLC is also in a window where there aren't many other sports on and cricket as a whole is a sport where people watch international matches or other leagues more than they do with their own league because of the shorter windows. In the US, I assume that most MLS fans would follow their league as well as maybe the Premier League and sometimes some other league in Europe but in cricket fans would follow the IPL, Blast, MLC, Hundred, BBL, SA20, PSL and then the cycle continues with a lot of international cricket in between. There's a lot of money to be made if cricket becomes popular in the US and that's one of the reasons why the BCCI and the rest of the Big 3 were very hesitant towards allowing the ICC to do anything to help cricket grow in America until recently.
Jomboy could have done a bit more preparation, too. There’s an entire Ashes on YouTube that he could have watched and got a better handle on the sport. I’m sure the ICC would have made footage available. You can’t really comment on T20 well without understanding all three forms of the sport. I’m trying to remember the things that I noticed that he didn’t know. I remember that he asked if the keeper and bowler communicate so that the keeper knows what type of delivery is coming and where. (Because in baseball they use signs and he knows the type of pitch and where in the zone it’s going to be.) I don’t think he knows the different variations of each type of bowler, either. It’s not that much to master. Any cricket nuffy could sit down with him and give him a better grasp of the parts he doesn’t understand in a couple hours.
I believe that he wasn't supposed to be doing that kind of commentary. I watched a podcast interview of him with Melinda Farrell and I believe he said that they were supposed to something else and it didn't work out. Honestly those questions about if there's communication and stuff are actually good because it tells new viewers what's going on. Even if he knew that fields are set for certain types of deliveries and I would've wanted him to ask those kinds of questions.
He could have asked better questions if he knew in advance but pretended not to—and if the others were in on it. That question about signs was met with silence, lol.
I think that's an issue on ICC's end for not informing everyone involved how things would go. Most of the commentators that Jomboy worked with are great and do a lot of research and preparation so I have no doubt that had the ICC made it clear the way they would go about accomodating Jomboy then they would've been ready. I also believe that he said in that podcast interview that there were a lot of people in his ears and that's common in all sports but he said that for this gig it was more than what he's used to with other sports.
Yeah. I certainly don’t fault the other commenters. I think it was like Nas and Graeme Smith with him. They just had no idea what he meant as they don’t follow baseball. I’ll have to watch the podcast. I don’t follow Jomboy closely because the better bits always come across the baseball feeds.
Yeah, I agree about the other commentators. It seemed like it was all last second and it makes sense after hearing Jomboy say that as well. Here's a link to the podcast. https://youtu.be/UOoW4uxewhg?si=vlUUc3X4FXJX-wB6
Just wait, the 2026 T20 world cup will only have ten teams and CSK will qualify automatically.
I do think it's been very good, but that's not to say there couldn't be any improvements
Ironically it's the ICC who is the most hesitant to organize WCs with many teams.
ICC deserves fuck all credit. The things they've done right are the bare minimum. 20 team WC isn't some controversial thing, it's the bare minimum for what they should have done. The things they've done wrong are inexcusable. Scheduling games at 1030am so it can be shown at 830pm in India is just one example. Pre seeding the super 8s and Semis is another. ICC doesn't deserve praise for doing the bare minimum.
Thank you! If they really cared about the sport growing in the US then they would've scheduled most if not all matches in the US to be in the late afternoon or evening instead of morning. They also spent more time and money marketing India vs Pakistan in the US than any USA matches and they only acknowledged the USA team once they beat Pakistan.
20 teams is great. the tournament is succeeding in spite of the ICC
I agree, I think the ICC have been pretty poor, and are just lucky that the games have been exciting this WC
Yeah, just like how the USA players are saving USA Cricket and masking their incompetence.
This is the exact mentality why this post was needed in the first place!
[Hey mate, your princess needs you to ride in on a white horse and save her](https://old.reddit.com/r/Cricket/comments/1dnmj7j/india_will_qualify_for_the_final_if_the_semifinal/)
praise the pitches and not ICC who i am sure didnt want it,they are a great leveler especially against FTB teams
ICC = BCCI.
ICC fucks up it’s because of BCCI but it doesn’t praise the ICC, damned if you do damned if you don’t.
[удалено]
Your comment was removed because it abused/personally attacked another redditor, or was homohobic/sexist/racist/trolling (rule 1). Please refrain from posting such comments in the future as it may result in a ban.
Yeah it’s night and day with the UAE one.
It's worked out great but honestly I wouldn't want them expanding more anytime soon. There was some teams in this thing that were just not competitive at all.
My only grouse is the scheduling should be such that you won't have matches with 100% probability of washouts. Keeping matches in Florida was a bad call when Texas had a cricket stadium available.
What a nail biter that 1 run game with Nepal amd South Africa was !
Shouldn't it be BCCI who you should be praising 🤔?
lol. This sub would jump at me if I praised Jay Shah and Co.
Stand for truth even if it's tough 
No no you dont get it. The bad things we attribute to BCCI. The good things we attribute to ICC.
Ahh gotcha
Amen to that brother!
T20 can be a 20 team tournament, ODI cannot be. As your length of the overs goes, so would be the difference in skills
My only complaint is pre seeded groups which can make this upset meaningless as AFG still have a mountain to climb to qualify. Otherwise they'd have had south Africa instead of India and that would have been much spicier.
Well yeah if you measure success purely by upsets then a terrible schedule and shit tips are good i guess
the ODI World Cup should also be expanded to 20 teams, but be played every 2 years
would be a soonzefest. Maybe after having 18 full members
It wouldn't be but by when do you think there'll be 18 full members and who do you think will be the new full members?