Amid growing concern over the ability of the West Indies authorities to stage the 2007 World Cup, rumours are circulating that Australia might be asked to step in and host the tournament.
The International Cricket Council meets in Barbados over the next two days and the issue of the 2007 World Cup is expected to be high on the agenda. A number of reports and newspaper articles in recent weeks have cast doubt on the assurances given by the organisers that the infrastructure will be in place in time. The poor standard of the facilities has caused the greatest worries, and although substantial investment is promised, there are doubts about the ability to raise the necessary finance in a region blighted by widespread poverty.
Officials from Cricket Australia (CA) have refused to comment ahead of the meeting, but Bob Merriman, chairman of CA, his believed to have spoken to state officials to warn of the fears regarding the situation in the Caribbean.
A representative of the New South Wales board revealed Merriman’s comments in an interview published in the Sydney Morning Herald. “Bob said that there were growing concerns at ICC level about the West Indies holding the event,” he told the newspaper. “The impression was given that Australia would be well placed to pick up the event should the West Indies not be able to. It’s no surprise that people are worried about the West Indies holding the tournament, because of their financial worries and the general instability in the area.”
Teddy Griffith, president of the West Indies cricket board (WICB), has reacted to suggestions in the press that Australia might be asked to step in and host the 2007 World Cup because of concerns about the Caribbean’s ability to stage the event.
An interview published in the Sydney Morning Herald with a representative of the New South Wales board revealed that Bob Merriman, chairman of Cricket Australia, had voiced his concern about West Indies’ ability to host the World Cup, due to “their financial worries and the general instability in the area.”
However, in a statement, Griffith replied by saying he had heard Merriman’s comments, but had “not yet had an opportunity to meet with him,” and claimed he was “in no position to say whether the comments attributed to him are accurate.”
He added: "Indeed, the 2007 World Cup is an agenda item for discussion at the ICC meetings over the next two days and it would be disappointing if any fellow director were to seek to prejudice sentiment outside of the meetings.
“To the best of my knowledge, neither the ICC board nor IDI Ltd (ICC Development International) board has met since the June meetings in London and Monaco respectively, to discuss the matter. WICB is fully aware of the significant challenges that it faces in hosting the 2007 World Cup.”
And he insisted they would be up to the task: “We are confident that as a nation we have the capacity to deliver on our obligations. We expect the fullest support and cooperation from all our fellow members of the ICC as we undertake our tasks.”
Why can't the ICC get one thing in mind, WC should be hosted in 3 places. Australia, England and subcontinent, I would prefer Australia over Windies anyday.
Hosting the World Cup in Australia is the best thing to do.
Just look how World Cup 1992 became the best World Cup ever hosted. Australia has amazing stadiums, capacities reaching 30,000+, floodlights, great ground service crew, recreation/tourist, good weather, the people are enthusiastic too, etc.
It's sad to see West Indies not succeed, but I would love to have the World Cup in Australia and no.. England is not a good place to have a World Cup.
well surely is the best place to host the WC, only becuase it has wonderfull infrasturcture to handle such a big event. its a pretty good tourist spot and Grounds are the best in the world.
where as England comes second and Third you can say SA or Subcontinent.
lets see what happenes in the meeting..