Going beyond the 10

The world cup in 2007 has seen 16 teams participate in the event. Despite many people arguing that it would dilute the entertainment on offer, the ICC maintains that it’s necessary for global expansion that the lesser nations are given the exposure that they so badly need. But is exposure alone enough to ensure that cricket is able to grow in these countries? I do have my reservations with this approach. The ICC’s methodology of allowing 6 associate nations to play against top teams once every 4 years is not only ludicrous but shows lack of planning for the future.

The world cup has given us two great upsets so far. Bangladesh’s win against India is considered important with regards to Bangladesh’s graduation from high school to the professional league of the test playing nations. But it is Ireland’s emphatic victory over Pakistan that has got everyone talking. The ICC have already started giving everyone their we-told-you-so’s, but how much impact will this victory have on Irish cricket in general is still much debatable. Kenya caused their first upset in the 96 world cup; they were semifinalists in the 2003 version. But is cricket better off in Kenya than it was 11 or even 4 years ago? I really doubt it. It’s been more or less at a standstill. Zimbabwe beat Australia way back in the 83 world cup. It has been almost 25 years since and Zimbabwe have instead taken a few steps backwards.

The world cup is the most followed event in the global cricket community. Not only have the extra teams increased the number of matches being played but have also increased the span of the tournament to a month and a half. These extra number of matches, which usually end up in results with embarrassing margins, not only take away the gloss from this much coveted tournament, but also does not significantly help the process of global expansion. I would not suggest removing all the associate teams from the tournament altogether, but would recommend only the best two to be allowed to play. It can be easily seen that Ireland was the best among all the associate nations whereas Bermuda could not find their feet at all.

Instead of 16 teams playing in the one day world cup, it would be more suitable for the same number to be in the Twenty20 world cup. With lesser number of overs in offer, the associate teams would not only have a much better chance at competing with the big boys but the format will be more easily accepted by their public.

But it is even more essential that the ICC continues to support the cricket establishment once cricket does begin to grow in one of the offshoots. The ICC can be held responsible for the majority of Zimbabwe’s failure to establish themselves in the cricket world. When Zimbabwean cricket was on the up, especially during the 99 world cup, and it had a number of world class players in its ranks, quite a few of them (Neil Johnson and Murray Goodwin being the most prominent) had to part ways with the national side in order to earn a livelihood. The ICC having enough money in its coffers could’ve easily supported the development of cricket in Zimbabwe. Instead it chose to deal the matter with utmost naivety and apathy.

Ireland, on the other hand, have the advantage of an established domestic cricket circuit in its proximity (that being English county cricket). So the win against Pakistan would do them more good than it would have to any of the other minnows playing. What Irish cricket needs is more popularity and that is exactly what the super 8 advancement got them. But even if cricket in Ireland does become popular, it will always remain in the shadows of English cricket as most of the talented and performing players would have a priority to play for England. But for now, Ireland should enjoy their success and hope that they can cause a further upset or two in the super 8s.