Well, does anyone know how the winner of this competition is decided?

Its going to turn into a bit of a farce if its up to the committees of the test playing nations to decide. One bid incorporates 4 of them, the`other has only two. Also, with the power house of the ICC really being India, does the Aus/NZ partnership stand much of a chance?

Frankly, with the fact that there's so few countries available with the infrastructure to host the world cup, they should really do it on a cyclical basis and STICK to that.

(a) NZ/Aus
(b) Eng/Holland/Scotland/Denmark/Wales/Ireland
(c) WI/USA/Bermuda
(d) Saf/Namibia/Kenya/Zimbabwe
(e) Pakistan/Bangladesh
(f) India/Sri Lanka

Also, I think its really, really poor to try and hold such a tournament over 4 of the test playing nations. The distances travelled could make this really difficult to organise. I can just see this being a logistics nightmare. I know Perth is a long way from Auckland, for example. But if Perth only had 2 games, then the distances travelled would be much less than trying to hackney a large scale international competition across 4 countries, 2 of which are huge on their own!!

I'd also like to make sure that the little teams get to host games. If the World Cup comes to England, I would be seriously disappointed if Holland didn't get to host their own games. This is of PARAMOUNT importance as it should easily help to raise the profile of the game in these territories.

Hence, I would like Aus/NZ to win this competition to stick to the previously arranged cycle and also ensure that in the future, Pakistan and India do not have to joint host this competition for the logistics problems as I've previously stated.

However, I can just see that the current belligerent Indian board will corner the ICC into ceding the tournament to them.