2013 Page 3
Suggestions for the World Cup 2016/7
-
Introduce DRS. This is the major
tournament in the sport after all, and if it's good enough for the
guys...
-
All points from the group stages
to be carried forward.*
-
Decide the table position at the
end of the Super 6s (if that format is retained) based on 'who beat
who' when those two teams met. If that match was a no result, check
with the matches against the next lower team in the table and so on.
In the very unlikely event that you reach the bottom of the table
(including all the matches in the group stage*) then count the
number of wickets lost by those two sides in all matches. The lowest
goes top. I suspect another tie breaker could be found beyond this
without the nonsense of NRR being required.**
-
Play semi-finals and a final -
this should make it less likely (though not impossible) that teams
reach the final when perhaps their earlier performance didn't merit
it.
-
Use international umpires as is
customary in bilateral tournaments in this sport. The standard in
this latest competition has been particularly poor in some games and
therefore some teams have been badly disadvantaged while others have
not. There will always be some variation but it has been more marked
this time than I can ever recall it.
-
Do not play day/night matches in
situations where the team batting first has such a huge advantage
that they have to throw the match away rather than win it.
* Despite
a number of emails from
followers of this World Cup, no one has been able to explain why
ALL points
from the group stages are not carried forward into the 6s. I have also
not heard any explanation from the experts on TV commentary. If a system
is in place which no one understands, should it be there? And anyway to
exclude the matches from the initial group against the sides eliminated
seems to be to be rather insulting. It is suggesting to those sides that
they might as well have stayed at home as they made no contribution to
the Cup. If that were really true then you shouldn't have asked them in
the first place!
** NRR is presumably supposed to
encourage teams to win as swiftly as possible, or obtain as convincing a
win as possible, but scenarios easily arise when it would pay a team to
do exactly the opposite and that is hardly in the interests of providing
an exciting spectator sport. You could hardly blame a team who took
advantage of this. The same problem may arise with the 'no points
carried forward' situation above. Yes - I know that you could throw a
match to ensure you'd meet the team you'd rather face in the next round,
but I think this scenario is rather less likely.
I typed the above
immediately following the end of the Word Cup 2012/13. However, it would
seem others have given rather more thought to this problem than I have.
I have received a pdf from Chris Langman which has given me much food
for thought. He sets out a number of principles he feels any set of
rules should follow and then outlines a format which complies with them
and gives rise to no more matches than were used in the recent
tournament. It is, in my opinion, an inspired piece of work, and I
recommend you read it! What he has come up with is revolutionary. If you
have any thoughts on his ideas then do email me and I will pass them on.
I have had some follow-up after the
release of Chris' ideas.
One email I've received says...
I have just read the piece from Chris Langman on alternate rules
for WC. You will not be surprised to hear that I think they are
excellent - not just because they put England (retrospectively) in the
final! They make perfect sense to me and the points are along exactly
the same lines as the ones I suggested to you....trying to ensure that
it is far less likely that 2 teams end on the same points and rewarding
teams for getting close!
The only thing I do take issue with is not including the
head-to-head game as a tie-breaker. Whilst I realise that using it
breaks one of his rules, it is a fairer/better/more understandable way
of splitting teams than number of wickets or PRR or bowling at stumps.
The very nature of sport is AvB and a win for one should count for more
than wickets taken across the tournament for example. That could be
dependent on conditions, the ground you get to play at, etc....head to
head is more relevant and fair to both teams - same day, same (ish)
conditions, same ground, etc.
Otherwise it is excellent. I am a fan of a win the toss in
advance scenario. I like the idea that in a 5 match series you toss once
before the 1st game and then alternate...it just seems fairer (although
picking a team becomes a different exercise I guess when you already
know if you will be bowling first/second).
Anyway...excellent article!
And another...
Why even bother having opening
Group Matches and the Super Six round? Only 8 teams are in the
competition, so put them all in the one group and everyone plays
everyone else. That would only add on one extra match for each
team and make the whole tournament fair and equitable for all.
If two teams are tied on points at the end then the team who won
the match between them both finishes higher; if more than two
teams tie on points then bring in Net Run Rate.
Then either have the top 2 teams
play the final, or the top 4 play semis-finals, depending on
choice. Yes, if the team who wins the group stage doesn't win
the final it might seem unfair, but who would run a World Cup
without a final?
What could be more simple than
that?
The season kicks off (sorry)
this weekend with the first round of the County Championship.
While the top teams hope this season the weather will treat us
more kindly, a few new changes to the rules, especially with
regard to the re-organising of washed-out fixtures, may make
things a little fairer. We'll have to wait and see. It will be a
strange year in at least one respect with the Championship
matches, except for the final, all over before the summer is
half done. Why this is so I cannot say but I would not like the
job of fitting in all the fixtures, county, super 4s,
internationals, EWDP etc that those in authority have to
struggle with, not to mention a nod to the non-ECB events
organised by the Lady Taverners and others. At Sussex we have
surprisingly little travelling to contend with for which we
should perhaps be thankful, but as you may know I prefer the
home and away competition. Is the fact we have more teams in
each division than we did a year or two ago the right way ahead?
I feel it's still too early to say and I have perhaps been too
hasty in wishing to meet the top teams more often. For the sport
as a whole, will it encourage those at the foot of each division
when they play sides further removed from their level and
encourage them to fight to improve? One hopes it will. Maybe by
about 2016 I'll have made my mind up! Meantime I can at last
spend a day (I hope!) watching five England internationals and,
who knows, some future ones in combat at East Grinstead CC.
One aspect of this tournament
that could be improved I feel is by playing matches in more
public places. So often they are tucked away where few if any
spectators will be watching a women's game for the first time.
Charlotte Edwards and others spend much time and many car-miles
around the country trying to encourage youngsters to take up the
sport, but county teams seem reluctant to play in public parks
(and yes some do have adequate facilities and fine pitches)
which would surely do more to increase public awareness that
women play cricket. Internationals, especially those that are
televised (sadly far too often only T20s) do increase the
sport's profile but I have seen how an admittedly small crowd
can build up to watch at least part of a game if you play where
passers-by spot what's going on. More than once I have heard "Is
that a girl playing out there?" "Can't be - or they must be
short of players!". "I think they're all girls". And then the
speakers stop to watch for a while. Variations on this
conversation always make me smile, and I find myself thinking
that at least some have been disabused of the idea cricket is
only for men and boys. Tucked away in the country at a small
club ground, the sport sometimes feels more like a private
function, and that's not the way to find the next generation of
players or followers of the sport, who might turn into helpers
in one form or another.
![[Sara Lord]](images/100424_109-Lord-Sara-Ssx.jpg)
Passers-by stop to watch a game in Chichester where the ground
is located between the shops and a major car park.
The batsman is Sussex's Sara Lord batting in a friendly against
Hampshire in 2010.
2013 Page 5 |