EC Open Floor: Powerful perspectives after ICC’s boilover World Cup decision

Two days on from the ICC announcement outlining changes to the formats for both the 2027 Men’s Cricket World Cup and the 2028 Men’s T20 World Cup, the fire continues to burn.

From current international cricketers affected by the decisions, fans of the emerging game and our very own contributors, the world has weighed in on the sweeping changes.

Read more on the official news here.

From a “Super Series” designed for teams 12, 13 and 14 to play for one group stage spot at effectively a 12-team main tournament on the 50-over side, there is also a likelihood of fewer Associate matches at the remodelled T20 World Cup, with five groups of four teams now in place instead of four groups of five.

With rejigged qualification processes also in place, largely at the detriment of smaller Full Members and Associates, there has been widespread condemnation from the cricket world.

Players provide their voice

We begin with Netherlands’ men’s captain Scott Edwards, three years on from the team’s qualification and participation at a 10-team Cricket World Cup, where they defeated South Africa and Bangladesh.

Edwards alongside several international cricketers provided their opinions in a World Cricketers’ Association statement (that you can read in full here).

”Qualifying for an ODI World Cup is a huge achievement for any country, so when the reality of that opportunity changes after years of planning, it’s incredibly disappointing,” Edwards began.

“The ICC talks a lot about growing the game globally but decisions like this make it harder for associate nations to play against the best teams in the world.

“Those opportunities are what helps countries improve and inspires the next generation of players. If we’re serious about making cricket a global sport, we should be creating more opportunities on the global stage not less.”

Taking an immediate reaction on X (formerly Twitter), Edwards’ teammates Max O’Dowd and Logan van Beek vented their frustrations.

“So you’re telling me, associate sides have to play in a 3 year 50 over tournament, to qualify for a qualifier to qualify for another tri-series qualifier to then qualify for a World Cup(?),” O’Dowd posted.

“You have to be kidding me,” van Beek replied.

And Edwards was not alone as international skippers.

Namibia, the side arguably dealt the worst hand in the 2027 Cricket World Cup pathway process, were represented in the condemnation by men’s skipper Gerhard Erasmus.

Not given an automatic spot despite hosting the global event next year, the recent decision means Erasmus’ side would have to go through another stage to reach a 12-team event that could be played on their shores.

Rumours that Namibia’s hosting rights will also be limited to the preliminary series have also circulated, though for the Eagles to compete, there is a chance they’d have to go through a Qualifier Play-off after three years in League 2, a Qualifier and the Super Series just to reach the final 12.

“For players in many countries, an ODI World Cup isn’t just another tournament, it’s our long form and something careers are built around and generations of players aspire to,” Erasmus said, also in the WCA statement.

“We all accept that you have to earn the right to be there, but we also want qualification to provide a real opportunity to compete on the biggest stage.

“This follows a long history of limited opportunity at associate level.”

USA and Scotland are flying high in Cricket World Cup League 2 and looking ahead to the Cricket World Cup Qualifier, though with the new format, there is uncertainty as to how the competition will look.

Beginning their respective 2027 Cricket World Cup qualification paths in early 2024, Scotland men’s captain Richie Berrington and USA all-rounder Harmeet Singh added their perspective to the WCA statement.

“Players don’t expect to make every decision, but we should be meaningfully consulted on decisions that have significant impacts on the game and on players’ careers,” Berrington argued.

“Better decisions are made when different perspectives are brought to the table, and we’re urging the game to start doing that properly.”

Harmeet added: “Countries and players invest years preparing for opportunities like an ODI World Cup.

“Those opportunities mean a lot, not just for the players involved but for growing the game in emerging countries and for the fans who invest in the game.

“That’s why decisions like these matter well beyond one tournament.”

Full Member internationals too leant their support to the cause.

New Zealand player Daryl Mitchell stated he and other Full Member cricketers were “fully supportive of players and countries around the world being provided with consistent and fair opportunities to reach and compete on the game’s biggest platforms,” while Paul Stirling, who has been part of Ireland’s move to Full Membership, looked back at his own experiences and the current FIFA World Cup as examples of the importance of open World Cups.

“The smaller and associate countries have consistently proven to add value and interest at global events,” Stirling said.

“The football World Cup we’ve just witnessed is testament to that in other sports and it would be great to see cricket take a similar approach to maximise opportunities for the game.”

Emerging Cricket’s own weigh in

On top of the reaction podcast, contributors of the project have penned their opinions on the news.

Tom Grunshaw

So the rumours were in fact true. Behind closed doors in Edinburgh, the ICC restructured both Men’s World Cups to suit its richest and most powerful.

Perhaps the unnecessary tinkering to the T20 World Cup can be excused. It’s not great but it’s not egregious. We’ll come back to that. What they have done to the ODI World Cup is nothing short of an abomination.

To recap, gone is the equitable 14-team format split into two groups of seven. The ICC has decided to introduce a three team ‘Super Series’ – more explicitly an extra qualifying round – to cut 14 teams to 12 (read: get rid of those pesky associates). The remaining 12 teams are split into two groups of six, which is followed now by a ‘Super Seven’ stage. The top three in each group advance, plus the best ranked 4th place. The Super Seven stage is then a round robin with first round fixtures repeated. All this to shoehorn in an extra India v Pakistan fixture for the benefit of the broadcasters.

Extra qualifying round excluded (because it’s not really the World Cup), this new format features the same number of matches as the old, but the path to the final is extended from 11 games to 13. Great if you’re a broadcaster. Awful if you’re not one of the top 7 teams in the world. But then, the ICC wouldn’t care about you if you were.

The qualifications process is also torn up. No longer is qualification 2 hosts + 8 sides by rankings + 4 teams from the qualifier, instead now 11 sides will qualify directly for the main stage, with three coming from the ‘World Cup Qualifier’, feeding into the extra qualifier. With associate nations unable to qualify by rankings, in a best case scenario only one could qualify for the World Cup proper.

Shounak Sarkar

Is there any sporting organisation in the world that is as maniacally determined at sabotaging its own world events as the International Cricket Council?

There certainly are very few contenders, though ICC sits in a league all its own. The global governing body has once again outdone itself, at the behest of its broadcasting masters and the all powerful BCCI, which functionally runs the ICC in every respect. 

While every other sport in the world busies itself with thinking about expansion and inclusivity, cricket’s hapless administrators become even more determined to make its premier event as exclusive as possible. 

Gone is the welcome “expansion” to a genuine 14-team World Cup after the horrendous snoozefests that were the group stages of the 10 team ODI World Cups in 2019 and 2023. Instead, the tournament is effectively a 12-team event, with the bottom two sides from the first round eliminated before the main competition truly begins. Their participation is in name only, effectively relegated to playing in a glorified “qualifier”. 

How soul-crushing it must be to work hard for four years to qualify for the ODI World Cup, only to be rewarded with an early elimination before you have even had a chance to square up against the cricketing heavyweights? We could end up with a situation where all Associates are shut out of the so called “World Cup” altogether. 

If the ICC is trying deliberately to kill off the ODI format for good, it could hardly do better. Genuine cricket fans should fear for its future. Its flagship quadrennial event cannot afford to be a bloated, convoluted mess which nobody wants other than the broadcasters who want India to play as many guaranteed games as possible before it faces the prospect of elimination. 

Has something as ridiculous as a “Super 7” stage ever been designed? And does anyone have the patience to sit through two long rounds of group stage games with little jeopardy to eliminate only eight teams in the event proper?

It is nothing short of an abomination. The great Bob Woolmer would be turning in his grave!

Loyal fans of the game given the floor to pen their thoughts

A number of fans of the Associate Game have submitted pieces as they react to the news that hit their feeds this week.

A page placing all of these submissions will be available in due course, though the best excerpts are below.

Osprey, Scotland

“As a Scottish cricket fan, I’m already conditioned to ICC decisions which negatively affect Scottish international cricket. Intercontinental Cup? Axed. Regional age-group tournaments? Gone without a second thought. The Targeted Assistance Performance Programme funding to develop professional structures? Discontinued as such funding is Cricket Scotland’s problem now. Zimbabwe getting admitted to the Women’s Future Tours Programme ahead of the higher ranked Scotland? Tough luck, the WFTP is for full members only.

“However, as shockingly predictable as it was, the most recent decision to change the format for next year’s Men’s ODI World Cup has generated more anger from Scottish cricket fans then any of the previous ICC moves I listed above. Everything about the proposal, which was railroaded through at the most recent ICC board meeting without any meaningful discussion, boils the blood. That it was made right here in our capital city of Edinburgh is a sucker punch.”

“In the past eight years, the Scottish men’s team has beaten Afghanistan, Ireland, West Indies, Zimbabwe and, most famously, England in ODI cricket – five of the current full members. In that time, they’ve also beaten Sri Lanka in a non-ODI 50 over game too and continued it’s 100% winning record against Bangladesh in T20 internationals. Given how infrequent these games against full members are, it highlights Scotland’s progress as a cricket nation over this period.

“While there is still a gap for associates to consistently beat full members in games, the competitive gap between Scotland and Bangladesh is much smaller than the gap between Bangladesh and India. More teams in the tournament would mean more competitive contests rather than fewer, as the ICC claim.”

Susan Pandit, Nepal

“For every (Associate) game, there are players away from their families for months, coaches with less facilities than their Full Member peers, and supporters dealing with complicated qualification tables and calculating net run rates because every point counts. A team could get through all of that, qualify for the final Qualifier and secure one of the spots at the World Cup, but then find out that it’s not really qualification. After just two matches, one bad afternoon could then take the country out of its ODI World Cup.

“No chance to face Australia, no opportunity to test ourselves against India, no experience of the pace attack of South Africa or England’s batting and no chance for a young Nepali fan to hear the national anthem before a World Cup match against one of the sport’s giants. What would we have been eligible for? Another qualifier. This is what hurts the most. The ICC has decided to add a qualification tournament within the World Cup for the countries that have been declared as qualified.

“It is perfectly just for players and officials from emerging countries to feel misled. They started out thinking they were in a race for a spot in a 14-team world competition. Now, the prize at the end of the road is diminished as they walk towards it. “Betrayal” may sound like a strong word, but it is difficult to find a better one. Suppose that you were asked to run a marathon with a specific finish line in mind. Then, close to the finish line, the organisers push it further away (but not for all runners). Any runner from the wealthiest country can get into the stadium, everyone else has to run another race in the parking lot.

“It is not just a restructuring. It’s altering the contract after years of preparation and sacrifice. The ICC claims that the new structure will make more meaningful matches and enhance competitiveness, but for whom? A match is not without significance because fewer people are watching it in Mumbai, London or Melbourne. It’s not less important because it’s not one of cricket’s richest boards.

“When meaning comes from the hearts of those who are attached to the outcome, it is there. When it comes from the hearts of those who are attached to the outcome, it is there. It is possible for a Nepali to feel more for a wicket in League 2 than for an entire bilateral series between two Full Members. The boundary in Kirtipur can be honoured in homes all over Nepal and among the Nepali community in Australia, the Gulf, Europe, Canada and the United States. Administrators may measure meaning through television audiences and advertising projections. Supporters measure it through hope.

“The present FIFA World Cup has demonstrated the potential that exists when smaller nations are provided with a true opportunity to participate in the World Cup. FIFA increased the number of teams in the World Cup to 48. The format was not ideal, the governing body was not ideal, but the concept was quite easy to understand: If a country qualified, then it could play in the World Cup. It was not cut off from the known countries and required to compete in another miniature tournament first.

“Cape Verde was the first to represent a nation of about half a million people in a World Cup. It didn’t have Argentina’s history, Spain’s academies, Germany’s infrastructure or England’s wealth. On paper, it was one of the smallest countries in the tournament. On the pitch it was one of the most memorable stories of the competition. Cape Verde held Spain to a goalless draw and then played a 2–2 draw against Uruguay. It advanced to the knockout round and played the defending champion Argentina. Argentina led twice and Cape Verde responded twice. The match came down to extra time before Argentina finally got away with a 3–2 win. Cape Verde didn’t win the tournament, but it was more proof that a nation’s population, finances and reputation are not a deciding factor when a match kicks off.”

You’re reading Emerging Cricket — brought to you by a passionate group of volunteers with a vision for cricket to be a truly global sport, and a mission to inspire passion to grow the game.

Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, please subscribe for regular updates, and follow EC on X, Facebook, LinkedIn and YouTube.

Don’t know where to start? Check out our features list, country profiles, and subscribe to our podcast. Support us from US$2 a month — and get exclusive benefits, by becoming an EC Patron.