res ipsa loquitur
2007-10-27 09:55:28 · 4 answers · asked by master_of_puppets4321 1 in Sports ➔ Cricket
Actually the 1992 WC and 1996 WC should have been played in 1991 and 1995.
(edit)The Australian season is from November to February overlapping two years. After 1987 WC in India,they should have had in Jan-Feb 1991 or Nov-Dec1991. That is where it went wrong.It was not corrected in India during the 1995.It was held in 1996. This was corrected only in 1999.
2007-10-27 16:51:08 · answer #1 · answered by karikalan 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually the 1992 WC and 1996 WC should have been played in 1991 and 1995.
(edit)The Australian season is from November to February overlapping two years. After 1987 WC in India,they should have had in Jan-Feb 1991 or Nov-Dec1991. That is where it went wrong.It was not corrected in India during the 1995.It was held in 1996. This was corrected only in 1999.
2007-10-28 06:23:38 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The 2000 Cricket World cup was hosted by England and some matches were played at Scotland, Ireland and netherland. to suit the climatic conditions of the country which host the tournament, it may not be possioble to hold the tournament exactly in 4 years gap The 1996 world cup was played in India. If the tournament is to be plahyed exactly after 4 years, the climatic condition of the host country will not be suitable for the tournament. That was the reason why the world cup was plahyed in 1999.
2007-10-28 00:38:22 · answer #3 · answered by vakayil k 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Australia won in 1987
Pakistan won in 1992
There was a 5 year gap between these two world cups where there should have been 4.
To set this rythm right , ICC decided to have the (19990 World cup in that year instead of in 2000.
So things are back to normal if u must say that.
2007-10-28 03:02:46 · answer #4 · answered by Iceman 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋