No World Cup for the minnows

Full Members are the governing bodies for cricket of a country recognised by the ICC, or nations associated for cricket purposes, or a geographical area, from which representative teams are qualified to play official Test matches (10 Members).

Associate Members are the governing bodies for cricket of a country recognised by the ICC, or countries associated for cricket purposes, or a geographical area, which does not qualify as a Full Member, but where cricket is firmly established and organised (38 Members).

Affiliate Members are the governing bodies for cricket of a country recognised by ICC, or countries associated for cricket purposes, or a geographical area (which is not part of one of those already constituted as a Full Member or Associate Member) where the ICC recognises that cricket is played in accordance with the Laws of Cricket (57 Members).

––Members Overview, The International Cricket Council

The International Cricket Council calls itself "the global governing body for international cricket, encompassing men's, women's and youth participation and competition". Alas, its flagship event, the ICC Cricket World Cup, features no more than 14 teams.

Here's more depressing news. The 12th edition of the so-called World Cup, which will be hosted in England four years later, will feature a grand total of 10 teams. Not surprisingly, the eight top-ranked ODI teams as on September 30, 2017, will gain automatic entry. The two remaining slots will be occupied by those teams who make the final of the qualifying tournament in Bangladesh in 2018.

This system is begging for a rethink.

In 2002, Brazil barely qualified for the 2002 FIFA World Cup before the likes of Ronaldo, Rivaldo and Cafu inspired them to a historic, record-extending fifth triumph in Japan and South Korea. Six years later, England inspired headlines like 'ENDLAND' by failing to make the cut for the European Championships in Poland and Ukraine. And as recently as last year, Zlatan Ibrahimovic declared that the World Cup would not be worth watching after Sweden lost to Portugal in the final game of qualifying. For all you know, the enigmatic striker may have watched every other game with the same passion we did.

Cricket can ill-afford such an open arrangement replete with shockers. Sad but true. The early ouster of India and Pakistan, in the main round of the 2007 World Cup, is a case in point. Imagine the hugely popular and revenue-generating Indian team failing to go past a football-style qualifying round if there was one. As long as the 'I' in ICC starts with India, this will not come to pass. In other words, it will never happen.

Over the last few years, the likes of Ireland and Afghanistan have captured our collective imagination with their fearless approach and sprightly cricket. Not to forget the likes of Scotland and the United Arab Emirates who go through many hardships to make themselves fighting fit every four years.

As if reducing the number of teams by four wasn't enough, the ICC has also conceded –– rather cockily –– that it would be almost impossible to ensure that the top Associate teams get enough number of games to be battle-ready for 2019. On Tuesday, ICC chief executive David Richardson put the onus on the Full Members to provide Afghanistan and Ireland –– two of the very best Associate teams –– with the opportunity to make the cut.

"It's difficult (for the ICC) to guarantee matches for them," Richardson said. "I think it's important that we provide the top Associate members the opportunity, and certainly the indications are that the Full Members will support Ireland in that objective. They not only will be playing matches against Full Members like England in particular, and teams visiting England, but they'll also be playing amongst themselves quite frequently. We're working on them having at least 10 ODIs per season leading up to qualification for that next World Cup, so I think the opportunity will be there," he added.

About Afghanistan, who have dodged bullets and bombs to get this far, Richardson had this to say, "Australia have been talking about tours involving Afghanistan. I don't think we'd have gone down this route if we weren't confident that we'd make sure that Ireland and Afghanistan both are playing in the region of eight to 10 ODIs per year."

But the operative part is that Ireland and Afghanistan have played just 11 and 10 ODIs, respectively, since April 2, 2011. And it remains to be seen how serious the Full Members will be about hosting or touring one or both of these nations. Do you fancy the Board of Control for Cricket in India extending a helping hand to Afghanistan? Heck, they haven't invited Bangladesh in all these years.

The moot point is that cricket aspires to be a global game, but ends up taking steps that make it utterly local. That's like a driver applying brakes to a vehicle going uphill. There's big talk of making cricket an Olympic sport. As is getting the USA and China to embrace it like baseball and badminton, respectively. But how far is that goal?