Why Associate Nations playing only the World Cup make no sense?

10 wickets; 210 runs; 205 runs; 175 runs; 215 runs; 9 wickets; 231 runs; 131 runs.

For those following the ICC World Cup 2011, the numbers above may not look too weird. These are the margins of defeat involving an ICC associate nation team. A few years ago, losing by such a margin was considered an absolute shame. Remember, India held the World Record for the largest margin of defeat in terms of runs (202 against England in the 1975 World Cup, thanks to Sunny Gavaskar’s famous 36 runs from 174 balls) – a record that stayed for almost 12 years!

This world cup (and the previous one) has proven that a top test playing nation can fancy breaking a few records against these hapless lesser fancied teams, unless of course, you are India or England!

I have nothing against the lesser cricketing nations playing the World Cup. My problem is the frequency at which they play. One can’t expect a Canada or a Holland to improve after playing just once in four years against the top sides. A classic example is that of the Kenyan side. World Cup semi-finalists in 2003 and now, three of the above eight numbers are against the African side. After the 2003 World Cup, Kenyans played just one quadrangular tournament and two matches in the Champions Trophy in three years! Imagine a World Cup Semi-finalist being treated like that, although the political unrest and match-fixing can be partly blamed for this! Between 2005 and 2007, the only ‘test playing nations’ that they played against was Bangladesh and Zimbabwe – definitely not the kind of teams you’d put in the top bracket. This team failed to even qualify for the World Twenty20, after nine months of absolutely no international cricket in 2008.

So here’s the point – you can’t throw an injured pigeon among the tigers, and expect it to come out unscathed! First, give them wings. Teach them to fly. (Am I sounding Siddhuish here?) For the game to develop in these regions, let these cricketers, and most of them really talented ones, meet the more fancied nations more frequently. Organise tri-nation and quadrangular events, inviting these associate nations as one of the teams. It would also do a world of good to these lesser countries if they are made to host with some financial assistance from the richer boards participating.

A case in point is Ireland hosting India and South Africa in Dublin in 2007. Although this wasn’t a triangular series, it still drew a good response from the local crowd. Irish team has won a lot of fans in the current edition of the World Cup, and was easily the best among the lesser equals. Obviously, that has something to do with their exposure to playing against the top test nations.

Sure, some of these matches in the tri-series/quadrangulars would be boring and one-sided. But then, at least, the World Cup matches won’t be! Hopefully. Besides, an upset in a tri-series/quadrangular would open the tournament wide open. Also, for players on an individual level, these would do a world of good. They can market themselves by performing against a top-side, and won’t have to wait for that once-in-four-years opportunity!

Imagine, what if the IPL world had seen a Kevin O’ Brien blitzkrieg much before the IPL-4 bidding? Imagine, what if Holland’s Pieter Seelar’s and Canada’s Hiral Patel’s skills had got noticed by the Mallyas and Ambanis? These guys would suddenly be living their dream by sharing the same dressing room with the likes of Sachin Tendulkar and Shane Warne!

Time to re-think. Maybe.