An amalgamation of all 3 formats: Can a true world champion of cricket be decided this way?
ODI World Championship is really the biggest prize in World Cup cricket. The adulation that the victorious players receive in their homes is unmatched. Winning an ODI World Cup reserves your place in your nation's cricketing history.
Sadly, teams displaying supremacy in the longest and shortest format of it are relatively not remembered or probably celebrated in the same way as the one-dayers. England and South Africa are yet to be termed world champions in spite of both teams remaining on top of Test rankings for considerable amount of time. I am not ignoring the importance of awarding of Test championship every year and the moolah that comes with it, but it does not possess the charm of a Dhoni lifting the trophy in his sleeveless tee.
If you don't agree, try answering this question in 2 seconds, without using Google of course: “Who was the runner up in the Test championship in 2012?” Some of you might answer it correctly, but clearly they will be a minority. The situation with T20s is different. Its history is as short as 7 years, so the accounts of wins and losses are fresh in our minds. But it is still a product of commerce rather than a tool for testing mettle. It is a leading actor successful in commercial movie waiting for that one break to prove he can act too.
So if ODI cricket is so important, why allow the the co-existence of T20s and Tests? T20s do not look like getting obsolete in the near future for its financial value and Tests will always survive owing to a need to preserve the heritage of cricket. Hence, I thought combining all these formats of cricket into a single tournament to eventually decide our winners would be a brilliant idea. It would make cricket win, a certain Mr. Shastri would say.
The otherwise laughed upon "just containing" bowlers and the "stay there till you die" batsman would finally get the credit that they deserve. It is not baseball, remember? We would manage to finally get over this over glorification of slam bang and boom boom form of cricket and also acknowledge the economic bowlers whose contribution is sometimes equally important as their wicket-taking colleagues. A squad with a balance of different kind of players and with consistency over the tournament would then really be feared. Not to forget we would be spared the agony of watching the current ‘world champions’ being humiliated in full public view.
The format I propose is this:
1. Starting exactly after the completion of the last ODI world cup, we will be maintaining the official rankings for Tests, ODIs and T20s. These rankings will be updated for four years till a terminal cut-off date (say one month before the next World Cup).
2. It is required that every Test playing nation would play each other at least once both home and away in these four years. This applies for every format of the game. The non-Test playing nations are under no such obligation. They would qualify through the lower division World Cup for associate nations.
3. The ranking system would be a niche software, allotting points not only on wins and losses but after taking a comprehensive approach on all the factors. For example, winning at home would fetch less points than winning away, defeating a higher ranked team would win more points etc.
4. The final seeding would be done by a cumulative sum of ranking points of every format of the game. For example, if India has 32, 43, 12 points in the three formats of the game, its ranking point would be a sum, i.e 87 at the end of four years.
5. Once the seeding is done, the groups can then be decided.
6. I will be assuming 16 teams to explain the rest of the format. The captains, vice-captains and wicket-keeper can change according to the format, but the squad for the World Cup cannot have more than 16 players. So bring along your most versatile players!
7. There will be four groups of four teams each.
8. Now if 1-16 are the final rankings of the nations,
Group A: Teams ranked 1,8,9,16
Group B: Teams ranked 2,7,10,15
Group C: Teams ranked 3,6,11,14
Group D: Teams ranked 4,5,12,13
The T20 League: First round of matches
# Every team in a group plays once with all other teams in its group. A total of 24 fast-paced matches to give a blitzkrieg start to the World Cup.
# On the completion of these matches, the winner of each group directly advances to the next phase. In case of tie in points, net run-rate breaks the tie.
# The second placed team in each group may have outsmarted the third and fourth placed, but their being second best means they are in for some playoff matches.
# The next round is a Super Six, so only 2 out of the 4 second placed teams can go through.
Knockout-Playoff: Second round of matches
# Call this the Knock-out Test Match round. A2 will play D2 and B2 will play C2 in a Test match. In case of a drawn match, the side with fewer wickets lost would win.
# Two teams, say A2 and B2 advance to the super six stage then.
Super Six: Round Robin
The 6 best teams should now be grilled well against each other.
# Every team starts with zero points and then plays all the remaining 5 teams. A total of 15 ODI matches.
# The two best teams out of this round robin now qualify for the final.
Best-of-three finals:
a) T20
b) Test
c) ODI (If required) - Giving the preferance to the shortest and longest formats of the game.
For all drawn Tests, the fewer wickets rule applies. Imagine a World Cup victorious team dancing in all whites, if you will.
Maybe it’s too drastic a change to accept currently, but in some distant future, this amalgamation of different formats may eventually capture the fans’ imagination.
Find the idea interesting, or just a wild fantasy? Leave the comments below.