WC Poll: Three matches so far, 0 excitement!! Do you really want to watch this?

@ram_cv (16513)
India
February 20, 2011 1:49pm CST
The World Cup is three matches old and none of the matches have been exciting. India pummeled Bangladesh by around 100 runs and that was the closest match so far. Kenyan team had half a day sight seeing tour planned, so hardly lasted half a match. Then Sri Lanka massacred the Canadians by 200 odd runs. Is this what you really want to watch in the world cup? Or do you want the best teams in the world to face up against each other? I think this is a poor start to the world cup, three matches and 0 excitement so far. I am hoping Zimbabwe will try to bring in some interest by taking Australia to the wire, but I am pretty sure it is going to be another one-sided affair. What do you think? Cheers! Ram
8 responses
@grvdubey11 (1879)
• India
24 Feb 11
Its indeed a poor start but it was expected isn't it.Among these teams Netherlands and Kenya are playing from last 4 world cups and they are still minnows.Doesn't ICC get this simple logic that their old ways of adding more teams to top league has been failed miserably.Bangladesh was given test status but they haven't won a match against any of the top teams since then.It would be better if the minnows are sent to India ,Australia ,England SA and SL to play against counties, club teams and Ranji teams .That will improve their cricket immensely.Giving them matches in world cup seem to be useless as they get hammered by top teams most of the time.Unfortunately for ICC, Zim was getting better since 1999 but political conditions in their country had very bad effect on their cricket.While Bangladesh showed some promise in ODIs but they still are minnows as far as test cricket is concerned.If ICC is really interested in expanding cricket they should take serious and logical decisions instead of organizing these useless matches.
2 people like this
@ram_cv (16513)
• India
24 Feb 11
Actually the only success of this associate system has been Sri Lanka. Even Zimbabwe has been there for ever and are still minnows. Bangladesh is showing signs of improvement, not because of their participation in the world cup, but the fact that they play regularly outside of the world cups. Cheers! Ram
• India
24 Feb 11
The thing with SL is they had enough talent to make it big in-spite of being a small country.But having talent is not enough you have to groom the players and build a team.There were players like Gavin Hamilton from Scotland who showed lot of promise and talent but disappeared from the scene as their teams only show up against big teams at world cups.You see in football most of the players play for clubs even if they are from a small country or a weak football team and as a result they give tough fight to top teams in international matches.I think there should be more cricketers in ICC than officials who dont understand cricket much.For eg i can expect Gavaskar, Kumble or Srinath making wise decisions good for cricket , not Rajiv Shukla or Jagmohan Dalmiya,same should be the case with ICC officials.
1 person likes this
@rameshchow (4426)
• India
21 Feb 11
Its happy to listen that india won by 87runs on bangladesh. Virendar sehwag equals the Kapil dev's score 175. This same scored by kapil in 1983 world cup, hope it is a plus point to indians.
1 person likes this
• India
22 Feb 11
Veeru i am a beeeeeeg fan of his half side shots... And Kohli i have great hopes on him, from the winning of under19 world cup.
@amitavroy (4819)
• India
23 Feb 11
yes man till now the only interesting match was the first one and the england vs canada which went to the last over. and apart from that all other matches were almost too easy for the team. this is really irritating. we expect much higher standards from all the teams. or else they should not be playing.
1 person likes this
@ram_cv (16513)
• India
24 Feb 11
You mean England vs. Holland. Yes, apart from that all the other matches have been pretty much one sided. Cheers! Ram
@lovedude (4447)
• India
21 Feb 11
Yeah.. but I guess it is because no matches were between equal teams.. specially canada and kenya are not that much powerful team which can beat NZ or lanka.. I guess first matches should be between equal teams.. even if between two poor rating teams match can be interesting.. but anyways of course later on we will have alot of fun specially when each match will be knock out kind of match.. that you loose you will be out at that time we will have great fun of cricket..
1 person likes this
@ram_cv (16513)
• India
21 Feb 11
Agreed. But the question is should these unequal teams be playing in the world cup. Cheers! Ram
@venkit (2955)
• India
21 Feb 11
surely there was not much excitement. but all the matches that hapened was between one strong opposition and other weak opposition, so there may not be a big excitement. but we can see some good cricket, when zimbawe and bagladesh play their coming matches. and when the match happen between two strong teams.
1 person likes this
@ram_cv (16513)
• India
21 Feb 11
Zimbabwe were also crushed by Australia yesterday. I am not sure whether these weak teams deserve their spot at the world cup. Cheers! Ram
• India
21 Feb 11
Matches which are mis-matches are bound to be boring without really any excitement, except when the minnows play perfectly on their given day werein one might find some level of excitement...had bangladesh restricted india to 300, it would have been an exciting contest...lets hope that the upcoming matches get exciting baring a few here and there which is bound to happen..
1 person likes this
@ram_cv (16513)
• India
21 Feb 11
But the question is how many one sided matches do we have before one upset!! That is what is upsetting me. :) Cheers! Ram
@vbpujara (646)
• Rajkot, India
20 Feb 11
Hi Friend, At least opening match should be between two equal teams but all depends on group of teams and fixtures,as we already know defeated teams are not enough strong and capable to fight opposite team.we can see some teams only in world cup or champions trophy that is Big Joke in Cricket, why they doesn't get to play more matches to improve skills and get better experience at international evel.ICC should think about this. one more thing is there should be four groups instead of two and one particular group for weak teams so we get to watch some interesting between them.
1 person likes this
@ram_cv (16513)
• India
21 Feb 11
Exactly agree with you. I think ICC's decision to go back to 10 teams is a good decision. That should be the status till the others start upping their standards. ICC can do that by inviting these teams for the youth world cups. Also every year they can mandate the full nations to play one series against one associate member. Cheers! Ram
@rajeev075 (1961)
• India
21 Feb 11
Hi You are right, but we have to give some chances to minos to improve and this is one of the platform. Sri Lanka too rosen from here only. One of the things organizer would have done they preety mixed the minos matches and should not be in beginning. Another way you can think that to get excitement at last is better than at earlier.
1 person likes this
@ram_cv (16513)
• India
21 Feb 11
I agree that the associate nations need to be given chance to improve. But World Cup is not that place. They can play in youth world cups. They can play with full nations during the years leading up to the world cup. But until and unless they start performing at the highest level, they cannot be playing in the world cup. Cheers! Ram