New Delhi: The pre seeding model adopted for the Super 8 stage has triggered widespread debate after creating a striking imbalance between the two groups. The International Cricket Council allocated fixed positions to leading teams before the tournament began, placing designated group toppers into predetermined slots regardless of eventual first round outcomes.
As a result, Group 1 now features four sides that finished at the top of their respective groups: India national cricket team, Zimbabwe national cricket team, West Indies cricket team and South Africa national cricket team. In contrast, Group 2 consists entirely of runners up, including Pakistan national cricket team, Sri Lanka national cricket team, England cricket team and New Zealand national cricket team.
This arrangement ensures that two of the strongest performers from the opening round will be eliminated before the semi finals, while at least one team that did not top its group has a comparatively smoother route to the last four. Traditionally, tournament formats reward teams for finishing first, but critics argue that the current structure weakens that incentive.
South Africa’s situation has drawn particular attention. Despite winning their group, they are effectively placed lower in the bracket because New Zealand had been assigned a higher pre tournament ranking. Consequently, once qualification for the Super 8 was confirmed, the remaining group fixtures carried limited impact on placement, reducing late stage suspense.
Concerns have also emerged over scheduling implications for co host Sri Lanka. Even if they reach the semi finals, the pre determined bracket would require them to travel to India rather than play in Colombo, limiting potential home advantage.
The International Cricket Council has defended the system, stating that early venue allocation was essential to manage logistics across India and Sri Lanka.
