The International Cricket Council has been very good at milking the cow. Those who form its marketing strategies come up with smart ideas that enable the governing body to obtain high profits through its various events.

The Champions Trophy, originally known as the ICC Knockout, started off in Bangladesh in 1998 and it was said that the game was to be played in countries that didn’t have full ICC membership, so that cricket would become popular in those countries.

But they stuck to that notion only once more. Kenya hosted the 2000 ICC Knockout and realizing the immense potential it had to generate money, the ICC soon shifted the tournament to a country that had full membership. Accordingly, the tournament was renamed the ICC Champions Trophy and it was held in Sri Lanka (2002), England (2004), India (2006) and lastly, South Africa (2009).

The idea of promoting the game in none Test playing nations was soon forgotten.

There have been occasions where even 12 teams competed in the tournament, but with T-20 cricket threatening to kill one-day cricket, the administrators wanted to do away with one-sided games as much as possible and limited the tournament to just eight teams.

West Indies qualified ahead of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka by the way, were just one step ahead of the West Indies at number seven. But as the West Indies sent a second string side, many were of the view that Bangladesh couldn’t have performed any worse.

But to their credit, the West Indies gave the stronger teams a scare or two. People say that Australia cruised to win the Champions Trophy, but that’s far from it. They were reduced to 171 for seven against the West Indies and then a thick inside edge of Mitchell Johnson was turned down by umpire Asad Rauf with the total on 180. Johnson went on to smash 73 and Australia posted 275 and the West Indies fell short by 50 runs, reaching 225.

They also say that there’s someone to bail out Australia when the going gets tough and this time it was umpire Asad Rauf.

However, it was just the kind of twist the tournament needed. For a moment, everyone was gearing up for the biggest upset of the competition.

The ICC said it was a massive success. The Australian captain said so; the New Zealand skipper felt so too.

But there were others who weren’t clearly happy.

The ICC says that the beloved ODI game is under threat from T-20. They want to ensure that the ODI format stays on. So did all the captains who spoke before the tournament got underway. But what kinds of wickets were provided in Johannesburg for the tournament?

Often, teams struggled to post totals of 200 plus on the green tops at Wanderers in Johannesburg. If one wanted one-day cricket to be protected, that’s not the type of track that you would give teams. Mind you, the Wanderers produced the wicket where South Africa successfully chased a 400 plus total set by the Australians three years ago.

England and New Zealand, who had attacks suited for seamer friendly tracks, benefited most. But their true form was found out when they returned to Centurion. England played their semi-final in Centurion while New Zealand played the final and Australia decided their fates fair and square.

So the big question is, with everyone going behind T-20 cricket, will the ODIs survive?