With the India-New Zealand clash being the latest casualty of the rain Gods, the 2019 ICC World Cup has now witnessed more washouts than any previous editions. With a total of four games already being abandoned without a lot of cricket being played, several fans and critics have expressed their displeasure towards the ICC for awarding the tournament to England. But, it is nevertheless the right decision.
Here are four reasons why England was the right venue for the quadrennial cricket extravaganza.
Following the pattern
The UK last hosted the World Cup in 1999 and that was a whole 20 years ago. In this period, the World Cup has been hosted by South Africa in 2003, West Indies in 2007, the Indian subcontinent in 2011, Australia and New Zealand in 2015, before returning back to the birthplace of the gentleman’s game. The only country to not host an edition during this period have been Pakistan, but one has to take into account the fact that they haven’t hosted a home series since almost a decade. Therefore, bringing the World Cup back to England was just the ICC following protocol and ensuring all major cricket playing countries get a chance to host the tournament this century.
Abundance of stadiums
As one of the frontrunners of the sport with plenty of history and heritage, England already have several state-of-the-art stadiums and the best facilities fit to host a big tournament like the World Cup. They have iconic stadiums like the Lords, Trent Bridge, Ageas Bowl, among others, that boast some the best facilities for visiting journalists as well as fans to enjoy. There wasn’t a need to invest money into constructing stadiums or building hotels and restaurants for the visiting teams and fans. If the World Cup was awarded to a place like Abu Dhabi, they would have had to construct new stadiums from scratch.
Unseasonal rain
The ICC issued a statement earlier this week defending their decision to give the World Cup to England, citing that the inclement weather was “extremely unseasonal rain.” The UK have received more than twice of the average rainfall for June in the past week, leading to the games being washed out. The World Cup in 1999 was also held in June and did not have too many rain setbacks, further justifying the fact that it is just unfortunate that a rainy stretch coincided with the World Cup this year.
Lack of alternatives
At this time of the year, hosting a tournament in the Indian subcontinent or in Australia is practically impossible due to the humid weather and the rains. South Africa could have been chosen as a potential venue but then they hosted one not even two decades back. Although West Indies have more conducive weather, they haven’t hosted a major ICC tournament since 2010 and have had problems with their board regarding player payments. Therefore, England and Wales were practically the only choice for hosting the 2019 World Cup.
Feature image courtesy: AFP Photo/ Dibyangshu Sarkar
