Was the 2007 cricket world cup a success?

Question

- In regards to the performance of your team?
- In regards to the intesity of the games?
- In regards to the handling of the tournament and the overall atmosphere and the crowd?


- In regards to the media hype, coverage and the commentary?
- In regards to the advancement of the game of cricket, did this tournament help?


I hope they somehow find a way to complete games instead of using this ridiculous Duckworth-lewis method...pity that it was used in THE WORLD CUP FINAL!

Answer 1

Success of World Cup:
- Great in terms of my country Australia winning it
- Some of the games were pointless
- Administration on organisation of the cup was pathetic, atmosphere at some games good others not so good
- Coverage of the earlier stages in Australia sucked, the first couple of games played by the Aussies weren't on free-to-air TV, which was unfair to fans that don't have Foxtel
- Didn't listen to commentary, so no comment on that
- Not that much media hype, just the usual reports on results
- I don't think it has done great things for the game, a lot of negatives come from this world cup - Bob Woolmar's death, early exits of Pakistan & India, and the riduculous conditions the final was played in.

As you say, hopefully they will find a better system than the D/L method, not taking anything away from the Australians, but winning in those circumstances does take a bit away from the victory.

Also hopefully the ICC can learn from the mistakes of this world cup to make sure we don't have a repeat of this in future world cups.

Answer 2

- In regards to the performance of your team?
Ohhh yeah...Gilchrist rocks!! Got the hatrick!!

- In regards to the intensity of the games?
Unlike most, I love it when an "underdog" team comes up and takes on the big teams. There were a few games that were a bit too onesided but if the smaller teams are only playing other smaller teams then they're not going to be able to test their mettle against the big guys. They'll never be quite sure how good they are unless they play the best.

- In regards to the handling of the tournament and the overall atmosphere and the crowd?
The should have cut priced the tickets for locals once they realised the grounds weren't going to be even close to full. I think whole event is probably a week or two too long as well.

- In regards to the media hype, coverage and the commentary?
In Australia the coverage has been great, the media hype would have been a bit greater with some drama, an unexpected loss or an injury or something. Commentary was great!

- In regards to the advancement of the game of cricket, did this tournament help?
Maybe to the smaller teams, I think Ireland probably got a bit of a boost by making it to the next round. Bangladesh showed they're making progress and in 4 years time who knows...Hopefully the West Indies, India and Pakistan got the wakeup call their teams needed to get better.

Answer 3

HORRIBLE FAILURE. I mean two good team, with the biggest audience went out in the first round, India and Pakistan. And i mean they played bad, but more importantly it wasnt fair especcially to india. South Africa lost to bangladesh but still went to the semis, because the Super 8s were ridiculously long. I mean its the system that made it failure. INdia and Pakistan only played 3 games in the 1st round??? I really think we should go back to the Super 6 system, where most of the matches are played in the prelims and each team only playing 3 teams in Super 6 so that teams wont be worn out by the semis, which i think happened to SA and NZ. And duckworth-lewis method is a joke and should be banned. When bangladesh played bermuda they only played 20 over??!?! thats ridiculous and even worse in a WORLD CUP FINAL each team only playes combines 74 overs? that has to be a record for lowest overs posted. And basically whoever won the toss got the edge. I think if teams dont want to delay games they need to put in retractable roofs in stadiums so rain shouldnt be a problem and lights should be in working order. All sports have roofs except for cricket which is ridiculous i really think we should have one.

Answer 4

A very short preliminary league resulting in the elimination of two Asian teams.
A truncated Final with interruptions.
A big yawn of a super eight league in between.
I am not saying this simply because my country India failed to advance to the super eight.
I think there are many lessons to learn from this world cup.
Australia and SriLanka deserved to be in the Final and Aussies were worthy winners.
But a more interesting 50 over Final between two keenly fighting teams should have been played.

Answer 5

I strongly feel that the cricket world cup was not at all upto expectations due to the fact that except two or three game no other game generated any excitement, some games were shortened due to rain, one sided semi final matches, spoil shot by rain in the final, early exit of India and Pakistan etc.

Answer 6

With regard to my team, they lost the final but they fought till the end and I am proud to be a Sri Lankan !

They did mature in the course of the tournment. Remember Aussies, next time the Sri Lankans will make you run!

Answer 7

i think that Duckworth lewis method is the most unfair method of deciding the winner.... It puts pressure on the batting side to bring the runrate up.....

In my opinion, after the match was delayed for 3 hours it should have been postponed to tmrrw!!!!!!!!!

Answer 8

An eye opener in certain aspects.

Answer 9

Yes.

Answer 10

It was a success, except for the fact that my homeland team (pakistan) got out in the group stage. but i was going for the Aussies the whole time, and they made me proud!!!!!
CONGRATS,AUSSIES!!!!!!!