Nothing's perfect... and the recent World Cup was no
exception. The format was borked when Sri Lanka failed to read the
script and started winning games, making a farce of the decision not to
carry all points through from the group stages; and issues with the
venues (some admittedly beyond the control of the cricketing
authorities) meant several games went ahead with no TV coverage, which
was unfortunate to say the least.
But overall I'd have to say that the tournament was pretty
great. (Not as great as it would have been if England had won, but...
you can't have everything. Apparently.)
More than anything this was because, while there was only
realistically ever one winner, the race to face Australia in the final
was a genuinely close call between England, West Indies and New Zealand;
with Sri Lanka also 'turning up' in the group stages at least.
That's why it is such a pity that we have to wait a
four-year eternity before we do it again. (Albeit with two (?) World
T20s in between.)
I would agree that a quadrennial tournament makes sense for
the men's game, which has test cricket to feast on; but the World Cup is
the primary focus of women's cricket and an annual competition would be
a key step forward in building the commercial momentum of the game,
allowing kids and more casual fans the opportunity to develop an
acquaintance with the players that just isn't possible when they are
only on-screen once in every four years.
Sure, it is a bit of a radical step. The traditionalists
won't like it; and I suspect that some of the players might be against
it too, on the grounds that it would be the final mail in the coffin of
women's test cricket.
But if we want to build a genuinely successful commercial future for the game, I think it is something we should consider.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.