The different World Cups Down Under: 1992 was better than 2015, let's face it

Written by:

The 2015 World Cup looks to have fallen into a deep slumber after the high-voltage match at Adelaide Oval where India beat arch-rivals Pakistan by 76 runs.

World Cup Special

More and more meaningless matches

The week that followed that match saw some meaningless encounters between the West Indies and Ireland although the latter won it, New Zealand and Scotland, Bangladesh and Afghanistan, UAE and Zimbabwe, Australia and Bangladesh and Afghanistan and Sri Lanka.

Only three matches, those between New Zealand and England, Pakistan and West Indies and South Africa and India are of some real interest in the week between February 15 and 22.


Unnecessarily dragged WCs produce nothing, biggest example is the 2007 edition

Such insignificant matches are likely to make this edition a lacklustre one like the 2007 one when India and Pakistan were knocked out in the very first round and two less popular teams, namely, Bangladesh and Ireland replaced them in the Super Eight stage.

Why not put in place a tournament like the 1992 edition where all nine teams played against each other and the best four sides advanced to the semifinal?

The '92 WC had a bad rain rule but its format has been the best so far

1992 WC had a dubious rain rule but otherwise it had a perfect format

The second World Cup being played Down Under has just not been as concise and compact like the first. Yes, the 1992 edition had its share of flaws, particularly the rain rule.

The Duckworth-Lewis system was still not in practice in those days and the sides batting second had a horrendous outing in case rain had intervened during the match hours.

India and South Africa had suffered the most against Australia and England, respectively, with the latter's '22 from 1 ball' challenge becoming cricket's crudest joke in history.

But otherwise the 1992 World Cup was a treat to watch. It was the first time the World Cup was played in colours, under the lights and with white balls. There was no one-sided batting skills as cricket sees nowadays and bowlers had their chances.

1992 saw just one match with 300-above scores, this time first 5 matches saw 300 or above scores

The 1992 show had seen just one match with scores above 300 when Zimbabwe scored 312 against Sri Lanka to lose the match at a less-known ground in New Plymouth in New Zealand. In 2015, the first five matches saw teams batting first scoring above 300 and one match seeing even the score getting overhauled (West Indies vs Ireland).

Cricket has evolved in 23 years, but let the game maintain a minimum standard

A period of 23 years is a long time for cricket's evolution. If the 1992 edition was a first-generation car, the 2015 edition is a driver-less car.

irect comparisons do not make any sense but if one thinks about the game, then there has to be a minimum standard. Teams like UAE, Afghanistan, Scotland, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe just make up the numbers, even if the last two sides are test-playing ones.

The ICC has thought of making the 2019 edition in England a 10-side affair. A welcome thought indeed. But again, the organisers must also keep in mind the time factor and not kill the game just for the sake of minting money.

Cricket's essence transcends the smell of money. Therein lies its immorality.

Please Wait while comments are loading...