The Dates Are All Wrong

The Cricket World Cup is only going to begin a month later

Stock phrase floating around: this might just be the greatest World Cup ever. 

Stock corollary: after sleeping through the first month.

The cricket World Cup needs an editor. A skilled editor cuts out the fluff, thereby reducing an excessive work to its essence. Nobody connected to the modern game seems likely to do this. Certainly not Professor Ratnakar Shetty, the World Cup’s tournament director, who recently told a publication why the draw favoured large teams, such as India: “Economically, we all know that India is the financial powerhouse of cricket. The exit of India and Pakistan from the ICC Cricket World Cup 2007 was a disaster for the tournament. The sponsors, broadcasters, tour operators, West Indies board—all lost a lot of money. The format was changed in such a way that it gives all the top teams a chance to compete. We have gone back to the same format that was used in 1996.”

To this end, we have a month of sleep cricket. Of the 14 teams, eight will qualify for the knockout stage and everyone knows which those eight are going to be. From 19 February 19 to 23 March, when the knockout stage begins, it’s as good as not being a tournament.

Take a moment to revisit your past. Roll back the years to a time before the IPL, before Lalit Modi, before the television revolution, before the match-fixing scandal, and heck, even Mark Mascarenhas. Settle on what was arguably the best World Cup ever. Remember Australia? Nine teams played each other once, there were semifinals, and then a final. It was brutal, but man, it was amazing. Everyone, even Zimbabwe, pulled their weight. And just like then, there’s no clear favourite now. It could be Australia. It could be India. Or England. Or. Or. Or. You wish the men who organise these tournaments would keep that in mind.

What tournaments of this length do is increase wealth, but kill the brand. At least one newspaper noticed that things were quiet on the excitement front. You don’t need market research to tell you that more unnecessary matches equals greater tedium, which, in turn, means that people like me cast a dubious eye on the intent behind these longer tournaments. Excessive contests bear the sound of fans get- ting shafted in the dealings between administrators and broadcasters. And it makes a one-time fan wonder: would you rather be remembered for a great tournament? Or a tournament that became great after a really boring part got over?

About The Author

Rahul Bhatia