The 2019 World Cup Does Not Expect To See The Likes Of India And England Losing To Countries Like Afghanistan

One of the most wonderful features of any World Cup, in any sport, is the 'upset' victory. Remember when North Korea stunned Italy in the 1966 FIFA World Cup in England? Or Cameroon shocked Argentina in the first match of the 1990 edition?

The cricket World Cup too has seen its share of famous upsets. Who can forget Zimbabwe flooring Australia in 1983? In fact, in the same tournament in England, they had India struggling at 17/5 before Kapil Dev hit the now-legendary 175 to get his team out of jail.

BCCL

In 1996, Kenya left West Indies shell-shocked in Pune. With former India batsman Sandeep Patil as coach, the African side also went on to reach the semifinals of the 2003 World Cup.

In that same tournament, Canada's John Davison blasted the then-fastest World Cup hundred, off just 67 balls, against the West Indies. In 2007 in the Caribbean, on St. Patrick's Day, Ireland beat Pakistan, a result that was followed by the tragic death of Pakistan coach Bob Woolmer. Ireland fans love to recall how their team successfully chased down 328 in Bangalore during the 2011 World Cup to embarrass England.

One feels for Scotland, whose 2019 World Cup hopes were hit for six by a dodgy LBW decision when they were on course to beat West Indies in Harare. Three months later, they smashed 371 to beat England - World Cup hosts and the world's top-ranked ODI team.

Will the 2019 World Cup be remembered for the bark and bite of the underdog? With Afghanistan improving by the day, perhaps one can pin hopes on them to create an upset or two.

However, the ICC's decision to limit the World Cup to just 10 teams for the moment may just rob the event of this essential element of a global championship. Former India batsman Sandeep Patil, who coached Kenya to the semis in the 2003 World Cup, defended the ICC, saying, "You can only include more teams as long as the tournament doesn't lose competitiveness. The ICC did give chances to the associate nations, but the performance and the progress shown by these teams isn't up to the mark. Maybe that is what prompted them to take this call," Patil told TOI.

Citing the example of Kenya, he said, "Kenya did nothing after 2003. The infrastructure, which is so necessary for a team to do well and produce players, was missing. Their cricket authorities completely mishandled things. You can't have Odumbes and Tikolos playing World Cups again and again. Maybe a similar thing has happened in the case of Ireland and Holland. Zimbabwe are also struggling. However, if you see Afghanistan, they have taken positive steps after being given a chance."

BCCL

But the question remains. With just 10 teams jousting for supremacy, the 'world' is missing from the World Cup. The decision, taken by the ICC at a time when the world body was being run by India, England and Australia, serves as a poor advertisement for a sport that is now putting up its hand for participation in the Olympics.

In the past, the World Cup served as a huge stage of exposure for associate nations like Holland, Scotland, Nepal, UAE and Hong Kong. Even till the 2015 World Cup Down Under, 14 teams were allowed to participate. The flip side, of course, is that too many teams meant a few meaningless games and an unnecessarily long tournament. Ironically, two of the most affected teams - Zimbabwe and Ireland - will be locked in a series which will finish on July 14, the day of the World Cup final. This will be the first Cup that Zimbabwe will miss since 1979. Playing as East Africa, they were a part of the inaugural edition in 1975 too.

The African team, however, has found a good way to 'distract' itself from the disappointment of missing out. In June-July, they'll be touring Holland, and then Ireland.

"It's a big loss to Zimbabwe cricket. I know many players in my team who were looking forward to playing in the World Cup, but we're left disheartened after we failed to qualify," said former India opener Lalchand Rajput, who is now coaching Zimbabwe.

"It's over a year since the qualifiers, and while we were disappointed at the time, to still be thinking about it a year later wouldn't be very constructive," former Ireland skipper Kevin O'Brien, who blasted a hundred off just 50 balls - the fastest World Cup hundred ever - to help Ireland turn the tables on England in the 2011 World Cup, told TOI from Dublin. Incidentally, just last Sunday, Ireland skittled Afghanistan out for a paltry 138.

During the recently-concluded IPL, Nepalese leg-spinner Sandeep Lamichhane had openly criticized the ICC's decision. "Sorry to say but a 10-team World Cup will hurt a lot of players like me, who will not be a part of it. I think there should be 14-16 teams in the World Cup."

BCCL

Few amongst the associate nations will disagree with him. Unfortunately, even the next World Cup in India will feature only 10 teams.

However, every dark cloud has a silver lining. The round-robin format, being introduced for the first time after the 1992 World Cup Down Under, is set to create a hyper-competitive event. No team can now take any opponent for granted, nor can they look forward to games in which they can 'relax' a bit.

To make the semis, a team will have to win at least six or seven games out of nine. That will require consistency. "You have an off day and you are gone," India coach Ravi Shastri recently said. Taking a cue from Pakistan's famous triumph in the 1992 World Cup, a team has to hit peak form from the last four stage, if it harbours hopes of going all the way in England.

Sri Lankan great Kumar Sangakarra hit the nail on the head when he said, "This will possibly be the most competitive World Cup of all time."