“Purely set up for India” ICC should be a little fairer: Vaughan

The current T20 World Cup, according to former England captain Michael Vaughan, is “purely set up for India,” and the International Cricket Council (ICC) ought to have treated other nations a little more “fairly” given that this isn’t a bilateral competition run primarily for financial benefit.

The 49-year-old Vaughan has frequently criticized India and the BCCI for using their financial and physical strength in international cricket.

“Well, it’s their tournament isn’t it? Literally it’s that. You know that. They get to play whenever they want, they know exactly where their semi-final is, they play every single game in the morning so people can watch them at night, obviously in India on the television,” Vaughan said during a podcast with Australian great Adam Gilchrist on the YouTube channel Club Prairie Fire.

Vaughan takes issue with the fact that India had to play all of its matches in the morning since it was more convenient for the Indian public to watch the matches in the evening. He took a hard line at the ICC for giving in to the financial strength of India.

“I get that money is a big play in the world of cricket, and I get that in bilateral series but you would think that when you get to a World Cup, the ICC should be a little bit fairer to everybody,” said the man, who scored 18 hundreds in 82 Tests and was the English skipper of the historic Ashes-winning side of 2005.

“When you get to a World Cup, there can’t be sympathy or any kind of sway towards one team in this tournament, and this tournament is purely set up for India. As simple as that,” Vaughan alleged.

It was evident from his remarks that an Indian team of such caliber could win cricket matches without any help or favors. The only team with a stable classification and a set semi-final venue was India, who also didn’t play a single night game.

“Indian supporters believe that on paper, probably they have got the best team, so they don’t need to do anything. They can win a night match, they don’t need to play in Guyana in a semi-final, which, by the way, rains 24 days out of 30 in June, so they have already had six days of dryness, so it’s going to rain,” Vaughan said, questioning the choice of venue.
He also questioned why a tournament of this size doesn’t have a reserve day.

Gilchrist agreed with Vaughan that a lot of Indian fans think that scheduling indeed has been “compromised”.

“There are some very, very passionate cricket supporters who are well aware of that and they are in agreement, it has been compromised it to an extent,” the flamboyant keeper-batter stated.

“Look, let’s say it again that India has been the best team, most consistent team throughout, may be South Africa too without losing a game but India should win it and good on them if they do it. But you are right, there aren’t too many Indian supporters who are naive and blind to that situation,” Gilchrist said.

In order to put Vaughan and Gilchrist’s accusations in perspective, it is important to note that pre-seedings, or pre-allocated sites, are an old ICC convention that, at one point in time, benefited nations with more clout in ICC matters—such as Australia, England, and New Zealand. Even the board of West Indies, whose executives followed the ECB’s lead.

For instance, in 1992, it was predetermined that unless they were paired against one another, the two co-hosts, Australia and New Zealand, would play their semi-finals at home in Sydney and Auckland.

Pakistan was promised a home quarterfinal in 1996, provided they would not play India (which they did, in Bengaluru).

Co-hosts Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and India were guaranteed home knockout matches in 2011.

It is evident that over the years, all teams in the T20 World Cup have had their seeds predetermined.

The post “Purely set up for India” ICC should be a little fairer: Vaughan appeared first on Cricket Country.