What could knock out the Champions Trophy?

We thought it had gone extinct, but it's back. And whether it's two years or eight, the Champions Trophy will return again.

A cockroach, a zombie, Dr Who - however you look at it, you cannot kill the Champions Trophy. It is cancelled, ignored, and has more costume changes than a chorus girl. But it will never die.

Yet, there’s one question that comes to mind when you bring up the Champions Trophy. ‘What’s the point?’ What’s the point of playing a tournament that’s not a World Cup (we have enough of those already)? What is the point of playing a tournament with the same major teams as the World Cup? What is the point of a tournament you keep cancelling only to bring back at random intervals?

What even is the Champions Trophy?

This tournament has been a lot of things, and also a lot of names. It was born as the Wills International Cup so that we had another major tournament to generate income between World Cups. At that point, it was essentially supposed to be used to grow the game outside of the Test nations.

This is why the first two editions were held in Bangladesh and Kenya. Remember, this was years before the first T20 was ever played and the ODI World Cup was just the ‘World Cup’, played every four years. So the idea that another global tournament could drive revenue (and help grow the sport, of course) may not necessarily have been a bad one.

So in 1998 we had the Wills International Cup, not to be confused with the Wills (cigarettes sponsored much of cricket back in those days) World Cup that was played just two years before. Wisden called it ‘The Mini World Cup’. It was played in Bangladesh, but that was only the third-choice venue, with even Florida being considered early in the planning stage.

The idea was to feature the full-member nations in a knockout tournament - but that was the first hitch, there were nine Test playing nations then. So a preliminary round was to be played between two countries. It was announced that the seedings would be decided based on the placings at the 1996 World Cup. But then, when the fixtures were eventually released, something else happened.

Sources close to the Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) confirmed to the Daily Star, that the ICC's commercial interests had been given maximum preference when preparing the draw. So while the rankings suggested that England should be in this preliminary knockout, suddenly it was New Zealand up against Zimbabwe. (So we were fixing schedules and events well before people started moaning about that for India.)

It was actually a great game to start things off, and Zimbabwe nearly knocked New Zealand out. Their Captain Alistair Campbell made a hundred and New Zealand’s Stephen Fleming nearly got one himself. But the hero was Chris Harris, whose rampage at the end saw New Zealand chase 40 off the last three overs. This was not a normal chase in ODIs back then. Clearly, he should have been the player of the match, but the award ended up going to Fleming - apparently a mistake. The story is that Ravi Shastri, making the award on behalf of all the TV commentators, couldn’t read whose name was scribbled on the note he got at the presentation.

What a way to start cricket’s most minor major tournament.

Not even the cricket crazy Bangladeshis were able to fill up the stadium (probably because their team wasn’t involved). The final ended up being contested between South Africa and the West Indies - not really the best result for the ICC’s “commercial interests”. But it was South Africa’s first major tournament final and ended up being their maiden - and so far only - ICC senior tournament trophy.

The stars for the Proteas were Jacques Kallis, Hansie Cronje and Mike Rindel. Anybody remember a Mike Rindel? That’s another theme to look out for with the Champions Trophy, the most random cricketers starring. Philo Wallace was the highest run-getter, Steve Elworthy and Merv Dillon were among the highest wicket-takers.

The crowds weren’t great, but the tournament worked and the ICC did end up making US$10 million, enough to convince them to try again in a couple of years.

In 2000, things were taken a bit more seriously. First, the tournament was rebranded as the ICC Knockout Trophy. That made it sound like less of a mini World Cup. Then hosting rights were given to Kenya and the hosts were invited to play, unlike in the previous edition. The ICC also flew out their pitch consultant Andy Atkinson to work on the wickets to make them more suitable for high-scoring games.

Bangladesh were also invited this time around, meaning there were 11 teams in total. So the preliminary round was given a fancy new name, the pre-quarter finals (I love how cricket will make up a new term just to not invite more teams). This time it was not decided on the ICC’s ‘commercial interests’, but on seedings from the 1999 World Cup. Even India and England had to play the first round.

New Zealand went on to win their first global title, when they beat hot favourites India in the final. All rounder Chris Cairns was the star of the show for the Kiwis, with a hundred coming in at No. 5 to help them chase down 264.

Though attendance was low throughout, this time the tournament ended up making US$13 million. And it perhaps played a part in Kenya making the semi-final of the 2003 World Cup. So in terms of what the tournament objectives were - earn more money and grow the game - things were kind of moving in the right direction.

By the end of the 2002 tournament, that big question of ‘Why are we playing this?’ really started coming up. The name was changed AGAIN - it was now called the ICC Champions Trophy. They stopped trying to host it in a country to grow the sport. India was originally supposed to host but their government refused to grant tax exemption, and so it was moved to Sri Lanka.

It wouldn’t be the last time it was hard to find a host nation for this tournament.

The knockout element was dropped and another team was invited, taking the total number of teams to 12. There were no pre-quarters this time, and they had a full-on league phase with four groups. Scheduling was not ideal, with it being played five months out from the World Cup. which had just two more teams. It was a slightly mini-World Cup.

And this time it was scheduled to clash with Sri Lanka’s monsoon season.

So we were going to have 15 matches in 18 days, which turned into 16 matches in 19 days. Sri Lanka won the toss and batted in the final, scoring 244 before rain came two overs into India’s chase. Luckily, there was a reserve day…

But a bizarre rule meant that the game had to start from scratch the next day. So Sri Lanka won the toss again, batted again and this time ended with 227. India were 8.4 overs into their reply when the game was called off and the teams were declared joint winners. 110 overs bowled but still no result.

It is the most Champions Trophy thing to ever happen. It is hard to take a tournament seriously when we have two winners, despite having two days of cricket.

Things just got worse in 2004. The third edition was an organisational disasterclass. Matthew Engel in Wisden described the tournament as one that, "deserves to be ranked … in the list of the Great Sporting Fiascos of our time."

Held a year after the World Cup, it really did seem like nobody cared about it. It was scheduled at the very back end of the English summer (we use that word in its loosest term). By that stage cricket had wrung itself dry in England, hosting seven Tests and 14 ODIs, and it struggled to draw in crowds.

The bloated format of the tournament continued, with the USA taking Netherlands’ place this time. They were bowled out for 65 against Australia, and we never really saw much of them again.

The only silver lining was that the West Indies, who had suffered a 4-0 drubbing at the hands of England in the Test series that summer, went on to beat that same side in the final. It was an absolute eighth-wicket heist when a strong young West Indian top-order failed, as a couple of tail-enders gave them their first title since 1979.

The final moments played out in near darkness, but when Ian Bradshaw got on one knee and drove Alex Wharf through point for the winning runs, for a brief moment, it did feel like maybe there was a point in this meaningless, badly organised and freezing cold tournament.

In 2006, the ICC decided there would be no more freebies and brought the number of teams back down to eight. The top 6 ranked teams qualified automatically, while the remaining four Test nations took part in a playoff for the two remaining spots. This time we were in India after the government had been convinced to grant a tax exemption. Surprisingly, no Asian side made it into the semis.

The cricket was good, if unpredictable, but the tournament’s most memorable moment turned out to be at the presentation of the trophy. Australia’s victorious skipper Ricky Ponting tapped BCCI president Sharad Pawar on the shoulder, gesturing to hand over the trophy, before the Australian team was seen nudging him off the stage in eagerness to celebrate their win. It drew criticism from all parts and there were even people who took to the streets demanding an apology from the Australians.

The 2006 edition was supposed to be the last Champions Trophy. The BCCI, by then a proper powerhouse in the game, said it just put too much of a financial burden on hosts and only World Cups were worth promoting.

But you can’t kill this damn thing.

2009 was another good one - Pakistan were supposed to host but security concerns saw the tournament postponed and shifted to South Africa. All pretenses of promoting the game outside Test nations were abandoned now, and just the top eight teams in the world got an invite. Fuck you, Kenya.

In the nearly three years that had passed since the previous edition, the cricketing landscape had changed dramatically. The IPL was now two seasons old, India had won a T20 World Cup and so 20 overs cricket was on the rise and ODIs were slowly being pushed to the backburner. Australia continued their dominance in the 50-over format and became the first team to win the tournament twice. Even if they never seemed to care that much for it.

It took four years for the next edition. This was going to be the last one, the ICC said. It was to be replaced by a Test Championship in 2017.

The cricket was good again but organisational blunders surfaced. With no reserve day for the final, in England no less, the title decider was reduced to a 20-over a side game. That’s right, a tournament played in a format that was being eaten alive by T20 cricket. India beat the hosts to take their title count to two. (Although weirdly, they have never won a 50-over final in the Champions Trophy).

The 2017 Champions Trophy was probably the best tournament for the ICC’s ‘commercial interests’. England hosted two in a row, but not because they were being greedy, just no one else wanted it. A short and sharp competition that got an India-Pakistan final…

Sure there was rain and Australia ended up with two games washed out, which saw them out of the tournament in the first round. But still, the cricket was good, the organising wasn’t terrible and it was a hugely followed final, thanks to India and Pakistan.

Fakhar Zaman’s hundred after being dismissed off a no-ball and Mohammed Amir’s exquisite opening spell where he picked up Shikhar Dhawan, Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli gave Pakistan the title in a 180-run rout.

Was this what we had been waiting for, just one big money pot, is that the point of the Champions Trophy? Money, an India-Pakistan game, white jackets, a chance to screw over the teams that cricket has always overlooked. Perhaps its real justification is just filling a three-week window every now and then because the cricket administrators are terrified that one blank spot in the calendar might ruin cricket forever.

What is the future for this tournament? The ICC confirmed the 2017 edition would be the last Champions Trophy. For reals this time. Promise. Cross our heart and hope to die. No takebacks. And yet, here we are again.

This might be the last 50-over edition, but that doesn’t mean we won’t get 20-over versions. Or something even more weird.

Maybe our species gets wiped out when Elon Musk realises how to clone himself in different genders on Mars. Would that stop the Champions Trophy? Nah. Every few years, the robots would battle it out for their chance to wear the white jackets. Playing every two to eight years, like clockwork. Because if there is one truth in cricket, it’s that you cannot knock out this former knockout.