New Delhi: For the first time in the history of the ICC T20 World Cup, the number of participating teams was pushed up to 20. This is a great sign for cricket’s global aspirations—more teams, greater eyeballs and increased chances for an upset or two.
All good so far, but the problem (at least from a neutral fan’s perspective) comes after that. The four Groups of five teams each meant there was little chance of a comeback after a single poor result. This meant that among the last round matches of the league stage, instead of being the most exciting, many were dead rubbers.
But that was that, as the Super 8s were expected to ramp up the intensity. To borrow from Indian spinner Varun Chakaravarthy, “Asli (Real) tournament starts now… dogfight very important.”
However, there is a flaw here as well. All the table-toppers from the group stage — India, South Africa, Zimbabwe and West Indies — are in the same Super Eight group. The ICC decided to reward staying unbeaten in the group stage with another round of matches against each other while bundling all the second-placed teams into another group.
The irony of it all was not lost on India skipper Suryakumar Yadav.
“I don’t know anything about pre-seedings or who does it but if I am in that situation, I will tweak it,” said Surya.
The ICC has acknowledged the criticism but said its hand was forced by a logistical necessity. Co-hosting a tournament across two countries requires venues and schedules to be locked in well before the group stage concludes, making pre-seeding unavoidable, the governing body said.
There is also the whole Pakistan angle with the 2009 champions refusing to play in India. If Sri Lanka reaches the semi-final or final, they won’t have home ground advantage. But if Pakistan reaches the semis or the final, they will get to play in Sri Lanka. Go figure!
As things stand, given the tension between the two neighbours, every ICC tournament played in India or Pakistan will face the same issues. Perhaps that is why there is some talk about a venue change.
The next two big-ticket ICC events (2029 Champions Trophy, 2031 World Cup) allotted to India could see a venue change due to the country’s political tensions with Pakistan, said a report in the Australian publication The Age.
But moving away from the subcontinent isn’t that easy. It is estimated that India generates about 80% of global ICC revenue. A look at the ICC’s year-ending revenue for 2021 showed that it raked in around $432,146 (India hosted the T20 World Cup in the UAE). In 2022, the revenue stayed in roughly the same range at $412,862, with Australia hosting the T20 World Cup. In 2023, with India hosting the ODI World Cup, the amount soared to $839,147.
Many companies investing in the game target the Indian market, so any event in India sees a big upsurge in ICC revenue. If the matches are scheduled for prime time (7pm-8pm slot) in India, it gives the sponsors even greater value. Commercially, it all adds up.
But a World Cup should be about more than just commerce. It is teams fighting for the right to be crowned ‘World Champions’ and while the ICC treats these events like a cash cow, for the players and the fans, the stage is what matters. And by that yardstick, the tournament has a problem of fairness.
The science of formatting in major global competitions, such as the FIFA World Cup or the UEFA Champions League, is a blend of sports analytics, probability, commercial engineering, and logistical optimization.
For the 2026 FIFA World Cup, the organisers needed to place 72 group-stage games in 16 cities across four time zones and schedule four or six per day in unique broadcast windows that satisfied viewers worldwide.
FIFA’s working group mapped out itineraries, and crafted a group stage where only around half the 48 teams would have to travel more than 1,000 miles in total. Not everyone will be happy but the idea is to be fair.
And that is something the ICC needs to work on more. Pre-seeding can increase the efficacy of the knockout and group-based designs but only if the ICC’s ranking system works. Right now, with teams often juggling formats and not playing their best XIs, accurately estimating the true ranking of the teams is difficult, which further complicates matters.
Another issue is the lack of knockout matches. In a tournament with 20 teams, the winner should not have to play just two knockout games (semi-final and final). True drama emerges when everything is on the line and that just doesn’t happen often enough in the cricket World Cup.
Some might say the criticism is pointless now as the tournament is already underway, but if it leads to a better, fairer World Cup in the future, it’ll be worth it.
