ICC decides 10-team 2015 WorldCup? No more associate teams. Do you agree?

Exactly, when associate teams will play with stronger teams like Australia, England, etc. they will definitely improve. We have example of Bangladesh. They have greatly improved in their game. Did you see yesterday's match, England Vs. Netherland? Was it one-sided? No! It was equally interesting until the very last overs. I concur with you that regular participation will improve the game of associate teams, but decisions like this will not give them proper opportunities to play with stronger teams and enhance their game.

Exactly! And its very insulting to the associate teams too! They have had no support, no exposure, no playing schedule for all these four years and then suddenly this decision! And as an ardent cricket fan, I feel cheated too! In fact when these teams were inducted, I was looking forward to some exciting variety other than the same old teams... you never know, in a few years time, given the proper exposure, any of these associate teams could easily challenge India and cricket and cricket lovers would be the ultimate winners! Yes, Netherlands put up a great challenge against England and I’m sure they would have come up further...ICC has cheated both cricket and cricket fans.

You have hit on the head of the nail Sudipta. No news, no show on TV and suddenly they are there to play world cup cricket. And why all the regular and stronger teams play the first match against the associate teams? They need not tale why, for every one knows veteran teams against veteran teams in the first round could affect their revenue collection and also to register their first win. Ludicrous. Yesterday I was watching Eng vs Netherlands and there were almost nil audience. Why focus only on money? You have enough money to do anything. Besides since 2003 Cup people are not so enthusiastic as they can watch games like the ashes series, India Pakistan. Really if I am offered a free entry in the VIP lounge to watch Cricket World Cup I would better opt out for sitting at home and watch them on TV.

I disagree on the last point. I think World Cup is the biggest stage and does not need to include the also rans and weak teams. The World Cup should be the show case of the best teams in the world and their matches. Right now the world cup has begun and I still do not feel the urge to put on my TV to watch the matches!! Cheers! Ram

I think they are not humiliated by big teams. Instead they are improving their skills and gaining more experience to come up in the future. Netherland has shown this yesterday by giving good challenge to England. Yes, you are quite right that the real competition will begin around or after quarterfinals, but every tournament should have initial stages and must include weaker teams, especially if it is a world cup.

Actually, due to this decision of ICC, I have to use the word "weaker" for Bangladesh and Zimbabwe teams. Please do contemplate yourself, are they both are really weaker teams? Should they not play in world cup? I am in complete agreement with you point that World Cup should be like a "showcase" for the best teams.

Those weaker teams will benefit of experience in the series between 3 or 4 countries, like recently in INDIA vs SOUTH AFRICA series they could have added kenya and/or zimbabve .

Yes, there have been a few series where teams like Zimbabwe and Bangladesh have played with other countries like India and Australia, but excluding them from world cup is not a good decision, especially in case of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe - the test playing teams.

Hi Rajesh, You have a very good suggestion, but the matches being played now are not a kind of qualifying matches? Since the top four teams will go up, these matches are definitely qualifying matches for the level II of the tournament. If ICC will discard those six teams, they how they will gain experience and capacity to fight with other good teams in future? I think, they need good platforms like World Cup to hone their skills and to provide challenge in future. Above all it's "World" Cup; I think they must be included.

Yes sishan, this would be mockery of the big evens like football, baseball and hockey when it is called a 'world cup'. Specially Zimbabwe and Bangladesh would be too disappointed if they are not allowed to participate.

I hope this decision will be changed as still there are four years in the next world cup.

Hi, Really, there will be no meaning of "World" in World Cup 2015. Matches of teams like India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Pakistan versus Associate Teams will definitely bring crowd into the stadium and there will be good sale. I am unable to understand why this decision is taken. Bangladesh and Zimbabwe are not only test teams but have also shown their potential in the past world cups. Like you, I am also disappointed with this decision of ICC making a 10-team tournament and calling it a World Cup.

I am also finding this decision very disappointing as associates teams are showing improvement with every match they play. Yesterday only, Netherlands made 292 runs! England had to bat till the very end in order to win the game. I hope ICC will take this decision back in favor of associate teams.

while credit should be given to associate/affiliate members, I just like to clarify Isubash520's comment. In 1999 and 2003 Zimbabwe were a full test nation, and in 2003 they only progressed because England forfeited their game in Harare due to safety/political reasons and similarly in 2003 New Zealand forfeited a game against Kenya because of safety reasons. While I enjoy watching the associate/affiliate members progress, and the Netherlands did give England a good game the other day, in general they haven't performed to well. For example Kenya's performances so far in 2011. Due to the time it takes to play a game either the format needs to be changed or number of teams need to be reduced so that the tournement takes place over a reasonable time scale, with most matches being readily availiable to watch. What I am confused about it how teams will qualify if there is only 10 teams, because just full members is just wrong, partly because it discourages associate/affiliate members, but mainly because Ireland are ranked higher than Zimbabwe in the ODI rankings

just to add, Ireland (who will have to qualify in 2015) just beat England (who won't have to qualify in 2015), and the ICC don't think they'll have to qualify

Hello Narendra, How are you doing? Yeah, that's right. Although, India has a national football team but it is not included in FIFA World Cup. You have pointed out quite well. Now I think that it is correct that all teams cannot be included in the ICC World Cup and only best or top 10 will be enough in order to make the tournament entertaining.

Yes, buddy, we all know that... Point is since India is not included in FIFA as they do not qualify, maybe associate teams should be kept out of world cup as they also not qualify for it due to their performance or ranking in ODI.

India have never played in a football world cup FINALS because they have never qualified for them.

Yes, the way Netherlands fought against England is just a reminder to ICC that they cannot ignore the minnows.

Exactly Lucky, I am in full agreement with you. This is not a fair decision and I think is entirely based on financial grounds as they are not earning good profits from a few matches due to the presence of associate teams. But at the same time, associate teams are showing their strength. Their performance has improved quite a lot and now they are giving competition to the big fishes of cricket.

Dear Nishant, It has been proven in the past that, matches with associate teams do not bring in a lot of crowd. IF you take the case of 2007 World Cup, where teams like India, Pakistan were out in the first round it self, the viewership of that World cup had reduced considerably.The stadiums were practically empty. And, plus it had ended up as a very long world cup. It is important to give good matches or the viewership will decrease, especially in this age of T20. It will be a shame if the one day format gets extinct...!!! My sympathies go along with the associate teams. But, to provide good matches, the best should participate and fight for the cup. In 2015, when they say 10 teams, there will be two associate teams in the tournament. the only difference will be that, it will be the best two of the lot. Let them prove themselves. If you take the case of the 2011 world cup matches so far, you will see that almost every time runs have been scored in excess of 300 and the associate teams have been shot out pretty soon. Come to think about it, it is actually a waste of time, hoping for an upset. Upsets do not happen that often...!!! Just because a country has a national team, it does not mean that they can participate in the world cup. If that was the case, then India would have been playing the foot ball World Cup. We have about 1.6 billion people, the viewership would have increased even more. But sadly that is not the case....!!!! I personally think, it is a great move. The standards of matches will be higher. Share your views... Balu.

But in the very first match of India versus Bangladesh, stadium was almost full. There was huge crowd there. Yes, maybe because one team was India and the other one was of Bangladesh itself. I agree, that when associate team wins a toss, the become puzzled as to what to do--if they bat first, will not be able to bat until end and if field first then opposition will put up a huge score of 300-plus on the scoreboard. But didn't you see what Netherland did? Please remember, they made fabulous 292 runs. You have greatly said that, "Why India does not participate in Football World Cup?" I have no answer for this as that is a great response. Thanks buddy.

Hello Balu, I appreciate your reasoning as the possible explanation of this decision, but should world cup not include all possible teams? It is correct that matches of associates teams consume time which seems useless as they will definitely not qualify, but I think it is good for cricket and cricket fans. People love to watch even past games. Why they would not enjoy live games of those associate teams? If ICC would not allow them to play and compete with good teams, how will they improve their game to fight back in future? I understand that they can be included in other tournaments, but since this is a "world" cup, I think they must be included as well.

I agree with your response :)

Hello Divyang, You got my point! That is what I want to convey. What does a 10-team "World" Cup means? Either they should removed the word "world" from the name of the tournament or they should include all possible countries to make it a real world cup. (I think ICC has some other meaning of this word in their dictionary.)

Well said, this decision is not acceptable. After all world cup should include all the teams. By allowing those associate teams to play in world cup, they will have an opportunity to learn from big teams and gain experience. And definitely their game will improve and like Netherlands, Bangladesh, and Zimbabwe, they all will become stronger to create great upsets in future.

Oh, I thought the whole tournament is called world cup. Really you have given a new information.

Hello Ranjith, Welcome to the wonderful world of myLot. I respect your opinion that there are definitely some grounds on which this decision was taken, but this is World Cup, and world has 200-plus countries. What is the use of reducing the number of teams and calling it a world cup? Every tournament becomes interesting as it progress, and at the next level this World Cup with 16 teams will also become interesting for those who do not want to waste their time to see so called "one-sided" matches of associate teams. Did you witnessed yesterday's match of Netherland Vs. England. Was it is one-sided? NO! Well said, Ranjith, Cricket should expand like football or soccer, but ICC does not want that. I agree with you that it will not expand with decisions like this. And for those teams what will be the better platform than this tournament for getting experienced and becoming competitive for future. I am still unable to digest that there will be a tournament in 2015 with 10 teams playing and it will be called as "World" Cup. LOL! (Once again, warm welcome to myLot, and many thanks for choosing my discussion for your first response in this fun-driven site, myLot)

can I just point out that a what is called a world cup is technically the final stage of competition. For example in football the world cup is the "World Cup Finals" and the world cup overall is made up of all the separate qualifying sections which include all 200+ FIFA teams. This is how they can call it a world cup. now with the length of ODI games there has too be only a few teams and the ICC will set up quailfying as they see fit. For the record in my opinion I would have 16 teams with 4 groups of 4. Then each team gets 3 games each and the top 2 from each group qualify for the quarter finals.

Agreed, but this decision has been taken by ICC for the next world cup in 2015. It is a great disappointment for cricket fans like us. Associates teams are playing good and giving challenge to big teams. You are correct Netherland has shown this yesterday. Bangladesh and Zimbabwe are test teams. Ireland is well prepared and seems competent. Above all, it's a world cup and all teams must be included.