a better idea for you, ICC

Top Contributors
T

timmyj51

Guest
a better idea for you, ICC

Having serious doubts about the value of this World Cricket League thing. Associate and affiliate teams are gonna have to fly to the other end of the world and play for weeks in strange lands. Predict there's
gonna be a bunch of defaults like the Canadians just did in Kenya. A better idea is to entirely scrap the WC qualifying tournament with regional qualifiers like they do in soccer.

Of the five non-first class WC slots up for grabs two should be allocated to Europe and one each to the Americas, Africa, and Asia/Pacifiic. The affiliate countries in each of these regions play a tournament among themselves and the winner then advances to play the associates in each region in single home/away matches. In the Americas, for example, the USA, Canada, Bermuda, Argentina, Caymans and one affiliate would play two matches with each other, home and away, with the overall winner gaining an automatic spot in the WC. Everything about this would be better than the WCL and WC qualifying procedure. First, the teams wouldn't have to travel half way around the world, play a couple of weeks, and then sitaround for 9 months with no international cricket.

In the case of the Americas, each team would play ten matches spread over three years. Teams would have a busy, but not onerous, international schedule. And teams would only be away for a few days at a time and wouldn't have to travel as far. But best of all each team would have five home games. How are you suppossed to "develop" cricket in your country when your team never plays at home! With home matches can now whip up local support, media attention, etc. In the case of the Americas I think USA would prefer their chances against the Candians and other teams to get into the WC rather than play in a single tournament against the rest of the world. The only downside to this is that it would cost the ICC more to organize single matches. But they just signed a big (at least by cricket standards) TV and sponsorship deal.

So how 'bout it, ICC? The Dubai base you've got your head in is
dry and crumbling, so pull your head out.
 
Re: a better idea for you, ICC

timmyj51;130860 said:
The only downside to this is that it would cost the ICC more to organize single matches.
Click to expand...
That's quite a downside. Flying 5 teams down to Argentina would be a massive expense. Flying Argentina up to North America 5 separate times would be a massive expense.

The bigger problem though is that many Associate/Affiliate cricketers have normal jobs. They're not full-time cricketers. They can't afford to fly all around the world just for a single match. Scheduling tournaments so a number of matches can be played all at once is the only way cricket will work for many of the Associate/Affiliate teams.

Not to mention that it would be a tremendous waste of time and money. The Full ICC members wouldn't even consider flying all over just for a single match. To ask the ICC to pay for hundreds of individual matches scattered all over the globe is rather ridiculous.
I think USA would prefer their chances against the Candians and other teams to get into the WC rather than play in a single tournament against the rest of the world
Click to expand...
Gee, ya think? As if that's a good reason to do anything. :rolleyes:

One difference between the FIFA World Cup and the ICC World Cup is that the ICC can actually claim to have the best 16 teams in the world. Allowing only one qualifier from each region could lower the quality of the World Cup itself.
Guess silence is assent.
Click to expand...
Or just a sign that most people have learned to skip your posts. And I don't mean to be rude when I say that, I just think that your posting history has probably led a lot of people to just tune you out and ignore you.
 
Re: a better idea for you, ICC

"That's quite a downside. Flying 5 teams down to Argentina would be a massive expense. Flying Argentina up to North America 5 separate times would be a massive expense."



Au contraire! The Argentina example is the exception. Just a hop, skip, and
a jump, for the USA, Canada,
Bermuda, and Caymans to play each other. Same with Europe; Scotland, Ireland, Netherlands
also just a hop, skip, and jump apart (for some of these matches
teams wouldn't even have to fly!). Same with Africa; with Namibia,
Uganda, Botswana, etc. More travel involved with Asia/Pacific but the
individual match arrangements, over all, would probably cost the ICC LESS!



"The bigger problem though is that many Associate/Affiliate cricketers have normal jobs."


And so they'd much prefer individual matches! Can play these in a
weekend. Fly (or drive) over on Friday, play Saturday, back on Sunday. Ask any
of the Associates and they'll tell you: getting away for these two
week tournaments, on the other side of the world, is what they hate.




"One difference between the FIFA World Cup and the ICC World Cup is that the ICC can actually claim to have the best 16 teams in the world."



And FIFA recognizes its obligation to develop soccer equally around the
world, something ICC does not for cricket. For the 2007 WC there's three teams from
Europe, two from North America. None from anywhere else. Not much
encouragement for the rest of the world.



"Maybe they're ignoring your posts."


Or, as in this case, don't take the time to think through what they're
saying
 
Re: a better idea for you, ICC

timmyj51;132923 said:
More travel involved with Asia/Pacific but the
individual match arrangements, over all, would probably cost the ICC LESS!
Click to expand...
Explain. How does flying every team to different places 5 or 6 times cost less then flying teams in for one tournament once? That makes no sense.



And so they'd much prefer individual matches! Can play these in a
weekend. Fly (or drive) over on Friday, play Saturday, back on Sunday.
Click to expand...
And what of people who work on weekends? You really think Associate cricket is going to improve (THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT!) by bussing these people in an hour beforehand and barely giving them the time to stretch, let alone practice? And then leaving the team immediately afterwards? How the heck can you expect a team to grow if they only meet for the matches and don't have any extended time together?




And FIFA recognizes its obligation to develop soccer equally around the
world, something ICC does not for cricket. For the 2007 WC there's three teams from
Europe, two from North America. None from anywhere else. Not much
encouragement for the rest of the world.
Click to expand...
You're crazy. Every team was given an equal opportunity to qualify. So now you don't even want the best Associate teams in the World Cup?

For the 2011 tournament, each region is sending multiple representatives to the various WCL tournaments. Each region is getting a fair shake. Declaring that each region only gets one team would make things less fair, and actually remove the "encouragement" for some teams. As it stands, a team from Asia can say "we can try to beat UAE, but if we can't, we can get a second chance against some other mid-level teams from around the world". Under your plan, it would be "beat UAE or else". Your plan definitely makes it harder for some teams to qualify, and removes the "carrot" of qualifying for the World Cup from a lot of teams.

Think of it this way: Argentina is still alive in the WCL. But they'd have no shot if they had to beat US, Canada, and Bermuda.


One thing you need to learn about cricket is that it's NOT a sport played equally all around the world. It's a commenwealth game. It has developed faster in former British colonies. That's not necessarily a good thing or a bad thing, it's just the way it is!

Or, as in this case, don't take the time to think through what they're
saying
Click to expand...
Oh yes, how could I be so foolish as to not see the inherent brilliance in flying Argentina and Fiji back and forth a billion times? And how could I be so stupid to not realize that playing a hundred more fixtures in a hundred different locations really wouldn't cost the ICC a billion dollars, it "would probably cost the ICC LESS"? :rolleyes:
 
Re: a better idea for you, ICC

"Explain. How does flying every team to different places 5 or 6 times cost less then flying teams in for one tournament once? "


Seem to forget with this WCL ICC will be footing the bill for at least one
tournament EVERY year between WCs, PLUS the WC qualifying tournament. And who
says eveyone's gonna fly? Scotland/Ireland/Netherlands/Denmark can
travel rail/boat to their matches. Same with Botswana/Namibia/Uganda.
Same with USA/Canada. Same with Oman/UAE. Footing the bill for one
match cheaper than for rest days.



"And what of people who work on weekends?"


If you work on weekends you're not gonna be able to play in tournaments
either cause they run over weekends or you'll have to travel on weekends.


"You really think Associate cricket is going to improve (THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT!) by bussing these people in an hour beforehand and barely giving them the time to stretch, let alone practice?"


Better than stepping onto a foreign ground, suffering from jetlag, in a
strange climate (what happened to the Canucks in Kenya?).


" How the heck can you expect a team to grow if they only meet for the matches and don't have any extended time together?"


With regional qualifying national teams will play at least three/four matches
in a year. With tournament qualifying they play together once....and then never see
each other for nine months.




"Think of it this way: Argentina is still alive in the WCL. But they'd have no shot if they had to beat US, Canada, and Bermuda."


Just to qualify for the WC Argenina's gonna have to travel to several
tournaments half way round the world, play teams they've never seen
before (some better than USA/Canada/Bermuda), on strange grounds. The
alternative is to play USA/Canada/Bermuda three times on their own
grounds in front of their own fans. No brainer.


"One thing you need to learn about cricket is that it's NOT a sport played equally all around the world. It's a commenwealth [sic] game."


And it'll stay that way with a tournament qualifying format.


The verdict is unanimous: regional qualifying saves ICC money,
more convenient for participating teams, fasttracks local cricket
development. Take it to the bank.
 
Re: a better idea for you, ICC

Just to go back to the example of Argentina. With this
WCL Argentina won't be playing until 2008 in the
Division 5 tournament. If they don't finish 1-2 here
they're DONE. No more WCL cricket for them. If they
finish 1 or 2 then they have to play another tournament,
Division 4, that year. If they finish 1 or 2 then they
play another tournament, Division 3. Only if they finish
1 or 2 in this tournament will they get into the WC
qualifying tournament. So they'll have to travel half way
around the world, play in three tournaments, just to
get into the WC qualifier. The alternative: play
USA, Canada, Bermuda, Caymans and an affiliate
twice each over three years with half the matches at
home. And if they can pull an upset or two and get some help
from the other teams, they go DIRECTLY into the WC! No brainer.
 
Re: a better idea for you, ICC

let me put this nonsense to rest. it would cost more money for the icc for example to fly bermuda for 5 diffrent times for 5 one game matches then it is to fly bermuda to kenya for two weeks,

* first of all airplane tickets would be outrages for 5 seprate trips

*secondly u would get better cricket in a wcl event for 2 straight weeks than u would in one off matches.

*thirdly timmy u need to leave this cricket stuff alone n go n watch baseball cause u would never understand the world of cricket , like amercians would never fully understand football (soccer)... The reasons y amercians r not intrested in cricket is cause there attention span is only bout and hour long,
n they want games to start n finish in less than that
 
Re: a better idea for you, ICC

"it would cost more money for the icc for example to fly bermuda for 5 diffrent times for 5 one game matches then it is to fly bermuda to kenya for two weeks,"




Hmmm..let's see, one flight, Bermuda to Miami,
one flight, Bermuda to Toronto, one flight Bermuda to
Caymans, one flight Bermuda to Argentina. Lodging for
two nights each trip. WCL: Flight from Bermuda to
Kenya lodging
for two weeks. Flight from Bermuda to India, two weeks
lodging. Flight, Bermuda to Australia, two weeks lodging.
And then there's the WC qualifier! Another trip! Two more weeks lodging!

Didn't know cricketers were so poor at arithmetic.


"secondly u would get better cricket in a wcl event for 2 straight weeks than u would in one off matches."


Really? Team that hasn't played any international cricket
in months flies half way around world, jetlag, strange climate,
strange pitches, have to play two weeks straight? Like
Canada's doing in Kenya right now, huh?

*
 
Re: a better idea for you, ICC

timmyj51;132923 said:
Or, as in this case, don't take the time to think through what they're
saying
Click to expand...

No, it's because they've learnt to ignore the crap that you sprout. Have you noticed that it's only the moderators that are replying to your posts because you are constanstly pushing the boundaries of the site? You've already offended one person on here and your constant trolling of the ICC and cricket in general has become tiresome and repetitive to the point where no-one wants to associate with you on this forum.

Your trolling of test cricket is boring, you constantly put down the game on here and you're ideas of how to improve the game are ludicrous and deluded. Some of the stuff said in this thread is the worst of the lot.

So far, you add little to the site and more often than not, it is just pure trolling. Your post in the "My World Ratings" thread is testament to that.

If you love baseball so much, go post on a baseball forum.
 
Re: a better idea for you, ICC

With WCL ICC's gonna foot the bill for 3 tournys in 2007, two in 2008,
another one in 2009, PLUS the WC qualifying. These tournys will involve
a total of 52 teams. So ICC's gotta foot the bill for sending 52 teams
on seven trips half way around the world, a weeks lodging for each
team each tourny (2 weeks lodging for the WC qualifier). Mucho, mucho,
mucho, dinero.


Regional qualifying: ICC has total of 32 associate members. Add one
affiliate to each regional tourny and the ICC has to foot the bill for only
36 teams, each making, at most, eight SHORT trips and requiring lodging for
TWO nights each trip. And with this arrangement ALL the associates have a
full international schedule.


DO THE MATH!!!!!
 
Re: a better idea for you, ICC

With WCL:

Joe cricketer must try to get off work to play weekdays on national team.
Takes twelve hour flight half way around world. Must play on strange ground, in strange climate,
with strange food, with jetlag. Hasn't played any international cricket in nine
months and now must play for a week straight. Tired, sore, maybe broken
down by end of tournament. Makes twelve hour flight back home. No one
at home knows, nor cares, where he's been. Doesn't play any international
cricket for the next nine months.


With regional qualifying:

Joe cricketer doesn't have to get off work during week. Hops on plane,
takes one hour flight to country near him. Plays one match. Is fresh,
invigorated. One hour flight back home, back at work on Monday. Next
international match a month later. Home match. Local media is out.
Friends, fans, on ground cheering local team on. Local officals have
lent hand in improving ground. Joe cricketer gets in car drives to
ground. Plays before supportive crowd. Extensive publicity for cricket and national team .


DO THE LOGIC!!!!!
 
Re: a better idea for you, ICC

First the Canucks got sick and now a player from Scotland just caught typhoid while playing
in the ICC's WCL gig in Kenya. Expect to see more of this with these
idiotic weeklong tournaments in far off, third world, countries.
 
Re: a better idea for you, ICC

Your absolutly right. Now that you have everyones support for your ideas on bigcricket, I suggest you take them to a higher level. Forget the ICC, their obviously incompentent, go straight to the national boards.

I'm sure Irish Cricket Union will be really appreciate your cost cutting measure of having their players take a boat to Scotland, and be thrilled at the idea of it being more difficult for them to qualify for the world cup.

And when you do, let us know what their response is, no doubt everyone here is eager to find out.
 
Re: a better idea for you, ICC

timmyj51;133477 said:
Once gain, silence is assent.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's because no-one cares and have learnt to ignore your deluded ramblings?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top