10 Teams in CWC 2015? Can't fathom that, ICC

So it’s been a week since the World Cup ended and as an Indian, I wouldn’t have it any other way. Winning the Cup after 28 years was just amazing, and I’m sure that all of us would be looking forward to see our team repeat the feat four years later in Australia, but what about the teams that won’t even have a chance to compete in the event? I am talking about the associate members of the ICC.

Through out the World Cup, there was talk that the ICC would reduce the number of teams in the next World Cup to the ten test playing nations. After the world cup ended, the ICC confirmed this decision, which means that none of the associate members, who put in some spirited performances would even get a chance to show their worth at a stage where it would be recognized and appreciated.

Despite their brave heroics in this World Cup, Ireland will sadly be not part of the next edition

This move has really left me puzzled, and sorry if I’m missing anything, but I just can’t see how this decision is for the larger good of the game. What are the possible reasons behind this decision? Is it –

• The fact that we wanted one sided competitions out of the World Cup, and wanted to maintain a certain standard of competition that is worthy of a world cup

OR

• Because no one really showed any interest in matches that involved the associate nations, and they did not generate enough revenue

If it is the former, there wasn’t much done to reduce one sided competitions in the first place. The only time that the associate members got a chance to play with the stronger test teams was at a World Cup, and there is a large sense of agreement that a World Cup is not the place for the associates to come and improve. Certainly, it is a big learning experience, but improvement in the true sense can hardly take place. Hence, it is important that associate nations play the stronger teams more often to improve. Now that there was a chance to do that, and have much improved competition in the next world cup, the ICC has in fact taken a step back by announcing that it would be restricted to only the test playing nations. I was happy to know that Sri Lanka would be involved in a tri-series against Ireland and Pakistan would be playing them in two ODI’s in May, certainly a step in the right direction, but then it doesn’t go in sync with the decision to not have the associates in the next World Cup. It’s like winning someone’s trust in small measures and them deserting them when it matters the most.

If it is the latter, then yes, it was a fact that matches involving the associate members did not generate as much interest and excitement, but certainly completely eliminating that sort of a contest is just too impulsive, almost barbaric. When has reducing the number of teams, in THE major competition done any good for the popularity of any sport? Also, even if there will be a healthy amount of interest for all the matches in the World Cup, it will be only limited to the test playing nations and a few others.

The Cricket World Cup is the world’s third most watched sporting event, with 2.2 billion people watching it, after the Summer Olympics and the Football World Cup, only because it is one of the most popular sports in the subcontinent (which has almost 2/6^th of the world’s population) , from where the majority of the viewership comes. So the viewership will essentially remain confined to the same circles of the globe. Also consider this situation; a World Cup in any sport generally generates interest in some non traditional/popular circles of the sport as well, owing to the media hype it generates. Now if someone switches on their television set and finds only ten nations competing in a “World Cup”, what kind of an impression does he get? How will it be exciting for an alien viewer who doesn’t know much about the sport of cricket? Is that generating interest in traditionally Non Cricketing nations, because that is how the sport will grow, right? Unless, god forbid, the ICC is not concerned about the growth of the sport, going against one of the very basic reason why international sports bodies exist.

I might be sounding harsh, and I’m sure that the ICC would have various developmental programmes in place, but this kind of a move sends out a very wrong signal to the emerging cricketing countries. Even to a seasoned cricket lover, it comes across as trying to make the sport restricted and elitist.

In the just concluded World Cup, Ireland was a team that consistently impressed one and all. Netherlands too begun their campaign well giving England a tough fight. Canada gave Pakistan a real scare. If only there was one associate nation that disappointed, it was Kenya, who’s standard of Cricket seems to have gone down over the past few years. But largely, there were flashes of brilliance from the associates, and from Ireland, more than just flashes. To be honest, Ireland should have qualified for the knockout stages, losing matches from positions of victory against Bangladesh and West Indies. Ironically, they also won from a position of certain defeat, against England on that magical night in Bangalore. They were easily the best fielding side in the tournament. They got the fastest ever hundred in a World Cup. There is real quality in that Irish Team, which is why I feel really sad that they got a raw deal in this decision by the ICC. The Irish cricket board only recently gave every player on the team a professional contract, before which they were just a bunch of amateurs who had day jobs. One wonders what impact it would have on the momentum and massive experience gained by the Irish team during this World Cup. When Ireland defeated England, it was major news in the Irish media, and even people who knew nothing about the game rejoiced when they defeated the “Ol’Enemy”.

Cricket had its two minutes of fame in the country, but I dearly hope it will be more than just that in the future. Understandably, the Irish cricketers are bitterly disappointed. Their captain William Porterfield was aghast, trying to fathom what they did wrong to be at the receiving end of this decision because Irish cricket had only grown in the recent years. Would the promising 18 year old George Dockrell only find himself playing in a World Cup 8 years later, when there would be a qualification for the last two spots out of the ten, when he is 26 years old? Would Paul Stirling now only get a chance in the limelight at 28? The 36 year old Trent Johnston tweeted that that the ICC has made his decision to retire from international Cricket that much easier. There is pain in that camp, one can feel it.

I also wonder why there can’t be a qualification process for every team in the world to be a part of the World Cup. Shouldn’t everyone be given an equal chance to prove that they belong at the highest level? How about merging the international bilateral series and tri-series with a constant qualification process? The world cricket calendar is dominated by the same teams playing each other too often, but maybe that is a debate for another time. Till now, there were more spots reserved in the world cup than there were up for qualification, whereas it should actually be the other way around. And now, not even that. Irish captain William Porterfield called the decision a “black day” for the sport, and I would have to agree with him for a minute, even though I don’t want to be pessimistic.