The eight years of fame — some might say eight years of shame — are over.

We have the brazen bats of David Warner and Glenn Maxwell, and then 90mph thunderbolts from Mitchell Johnson, to thank for that.

So in an afternoon of ultimately one-sided World Cup cricket, Bermuda were twice expunged from the record books of underachievement: first for the highest score conceded and second for the largest margin of defeat by runs, which had been equalled at this tournament by West Indies, our supposed regional guardians in world cricket.

Spare a thought for Afghanistan and the continuing malaise of the Associate Member as the International Cricket Council reinvents the term “globalising” to actually mean “less equals more”.

For the purpose of this endeavour, “less” Associate Members equates to “more” money in the coffers of the Full Members, in particular those of the already resource-rich “Big Three” of India, Australia and England.

Those who dreaded what might come of that fateful meeting in Dubai in January 2014 are now seeing the endgame, as the “death of the little man” is being played out in front our eyes, despite evidence from the likes of Ireland, Scotland, United Arab Emirates and Afghanistan, too, that their brand of cricket and their contribution to the 2015 Cricket World Cup should not be put into the realms of “I told you so” simply because of an isolated 275-run defeat.

We have seen already that one-sided matches are not the domain of the Associate Members alone, but even the “Big Three”.

England have had their very own “big three”, if you will — a crushing 111-run defeat by Australia, chasing 342; an eight-wicket loss to New Zealand, having made a mere 123 that exercised the chasing Brendon McCullum and Co only two balls into the thirteenth over; and a nine-wicket thrashing by Sri Lanka defending 309, with run-a-ball centuries for two men whose combined age is 62.

Each reversal was worse than what had gone before and on each occasion England enjoyed the more favourable of the conditions, as one might presume after winning every toss.

Given that evidence, all you need is to replace “England” with “Bermuda” as the opposition for the critics of inclusion to be out in force against the largely amateur cricketer, whose chance to face a Mitchell Johnson or an AB de Villiers may come along only once in a lifetime.

But, no. Even in this more inclusive version of the World Cup, England are still in a position to win the tournament, as ridiculous as that may sound. All they need is to hit form at the right time — starting on Monday against Bangladesh — and, five victories later, they are world champions.

That is far more than can be said for aspiring Associate Members such as Nepal and Uganda — I could add Bermuda, but we are hardly deserving of being in that conversation at present.

The aforementioned are growing the game in their countries at a pretty decent rate and the results can be seen in their progress through the ICC World Cricket League rankings.

For Uganda, who were so cruelly deprived of the right to host their first major international tournament last autumn because of American-led scaremongering over terrorist threats that today remain unrealised, not to mention grossly ill-informed concerns over ebola — an atlas should have helped in that regard to highlight the geographical difference between West Africa and East Africa — relegation back to Division Three after the tournament in Namibia two months ago appears a minor blip in their ascension.

By comparison, the story of Afghanistan is remarkable: scything through the divisions before reaching the top and now being afforded one-day international status. The trick now is in getting the Full Member nations to revisit their schedules and engage them in meaningful competition once the fun and games are finished Down Under.

So while the pasting they took at the hands of the pre-tournament favourites is a blow for the Associates, Afghanistan and their peers have far more to be proud of, the latest example being Scotland’s brave effort against Bangladesh. The Scots compiled a record high score for an Associate at a World Cup before the experience of their Asian rivals, who were ranked below Bermuda only 20 years ago, told in a six-wicket victory.

At the time of writing, Shaiman Anwar was the leading run-scorer at the World Cup. “Shai who?” Exactly. The United Arab Emirates No 6, who belatedly was given a promotion up the order by one place for the match against India, has amassed 270 runs in four innings, with one hundred and two fifties.

Aged 35, and with the ICC reducing the next tournament to ten teams, this may be a final go-round for the man who goes by the nickname “Sir Viv” in the UAE dressing room.

The shipping employee is like many other part-timers for whom a chance to mix it with the game’s elite is a priceless opportunity.

A pity that the ICC has managed to put a price on it.