Once the thing has got underway fully, I'll no doubt weigh in with an opinion or two on the games themselves. (And no, I don't mean I'm just waiting for England to play, because 'only then does the tournament start properly'; I just think that a weekend of minnow-crushing doesn't give many pointers as to the form of the teams involved. Did we really doubt that Kenya and Canada would be humbled? [Although, actually, didn't England only just scrape past Canada? Maybe England should be classed as minnows, too. To be honest, that's probably not a bad idea: then at least we wouldn't go into the match against the Netherlands as firm favourites; we all know how that's turned out in the past...])
For the moment, here are some suggestions for the ICC of ways to ensure future World Cups aren't overshadowed in the excitement stakes by their own adverts.
- drastically limit the number of teams involved: I know, I know, allowing Canada/Netherlands/etc. to take part encourages interest in those countries, increasing revenue, and thereby aiding development -- honestly, though, when Kenya get destroyed by 10 wickets, how much good is that doing...well, anyone?
- shorten the tournament: a by-product of the first point, but the length of time covered by the WC needs to be analysed. Cutting out the second group stage (Super Sixes) is a good start.
- play Twenty20 instead: ok, not an entirely serious point, but do we really need a WC as well as a World T20?
I could go on, but it's time to go and watch the highlights: having cricket on terrestrial tv is a wonderful thing. Also, it's Sri Lanka, for whom I do have a bit of a soft spot -- I'd love another 'home' win for them, 15 years after their first...
No comments:
Post a Comment