Cricket and the Olympics

[Beleg]

Not Global.

Sorry, but if 1.5 billion people have some sort of a vested interested in either watching or playing the game than it's global enough for me, no matter what the number of countries that play it compeitively.

If India, Pakistan and Bangladesh were divided into 30 smaller countries, will it become global enough??? Punjab on its own can easily support an international team. So can Sindh. And NWFP. Hell, Lahore, Karachi, Rawalpindi - of of these cities can field a team of 11 solid players with a little bit of resource tinkering and money.

If that's the case in Pakistan, just wonder what it would be in India.

 

[Smudge]

Not Global.

Sorry, but if 1.5 billion people have some sort of a vested interested in either watching or playing the game than it's global enough for me, no matter what the number of countries that play it compeitively.

You don't seem to know what global means then...

glob·al ( P ) Pronunciation Key (glbl)
adj.
Having the shape of a globe; spherical.
Of, relating to, or involving the entire earth; worldwide: global war; global monetary policies.
Comprehensive; total: “a... global, generalized sense of loss” (Maggie Scarf).
Computer Science. Of or relating to an entire program, document, or file.

If India, Pakistan and Bangladesh were divided into 30 smaller countries, will it become global enough??? Punjab on its own can easily support an international team. So can Sindh. And NWFP. Hell, Lahore, Karachi, Rawalpindi - of of these cities can field a team of 11 solid players with a little bit of resource tinkering and money.

Would Punjab field a team that was 3 wickets for no run after the opening over?

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Or perhaps not...

Or perhaps it could...

Who wants that?
There two too many test teams at the moment anyway. Worst of all, the yanks might start playing it, what a disaster that would be!

Okay, for one, I didn't make one reference to test cricket. And anyway, how on Earth is there too many teams? There's 9 of them! (excluding Zimbabwe) I'm not saying that pathetic teams should be given test status just to make cricket more Global, I'm saying that if cricket were to make an appearance in the Olympics it could definately help to push it's appeal wider.

 

[marc71178]

It can be found in 120 countries.

About 110 at a very low level.

 

[Josh]

About 110 at a very low level.

Only about 30 countries are good at soccer, yet it's "global".

 

[Truekiwijoker]

, for one, I didn't make one reference to test cricket. And anyway, how on Earth is there too many teams? There's 9 of them! (excluding Zimbabwe) I'm not saying that pathetic teams should be given test status just to make cricket more Global, I'm saying that if cricket were to make an appearance in the Olympics it could definately help to push it's appeal wider.

There are too many teams because games take 5 days too play, and take a physical toll on players. It can be played only in favourable weather conditions. Tours require a large investment in time and money and the test circuit is already crowded. There is already enough quality cricket and contrast in styles, the game doesn't need any more for a while IMO.

The only way to include Cricket at the olympics seems to be with this twenty20 guff, which has very little merit. While Cricket is unattractive to countries without a major tradition and infrastructure in the game, it would be worse with this twenty20 game, and realistically would make the game look of little merit.
And in any case, why push Crickets wider appeal? what's the point? what good would it achieve?

 

[Truekiwijoker]

Well what defines global? When you can pitch up in Nepal with a bat and have a game with kids that have never spoken English, then you get an idea as to where things are going.. Guess it depends how seriously you want people to play, you could argue that only a handful of latin American and European countries have a hope at winning the football world cup

It's not global because... trust me on this... it is NOT a major sport outside of the existing 10 test playing countries. While there might be existing Cricket associations in countries like the Netherlands, you can take it from me the average public member couldn't give a rats **** about Cricket, and it's not likely to change any time in the future. I'd be surprised if their teams performances in the world cup are even broadcast on a major telelvision network.

And as for the FIFA world cup, the game IS global. Every participating member has a major soccer establishment and infrastructure and has qualified ahead of other countries in a similar position. While the competition has only been won bya few countries, all of whom are either from South America of Europe, it's worth noting that there have only been 18 world cups and that there are alot of countries in Europe.
In previous world cups teams from Central/North America, Africa and the orient have made an impact,and are ever improving. The only 'bunny' team I saw in 2002 was Saudi Arabia.
The last world cup saw the unfancied Germans (beaten pre-tournament 5-1 by England) scrape their way past superior opponents to finalise against a Briazilian tema that almost didn't qualify!They beat two unfancied teams Turkey and South Korea to get to the final, the former of whom palyed some excellent football throughout the tournament, and the latter is from the orient.
The 1998 world cup saw unfancied hosts France beat an overrated and underp par Word champs Brazil, after beating the unfancied Croatians in the semis.
The 1994 world cup saw an unfancied (believe it or not) Brazilian team triumph over favourites Italy, whod beaten unfancied Bulgaria in the semis.
The 1990 world cup saw ageing and lacklustre Germany beat falkey defending cahmps Argentina in the final.
The 1986 world cup was the last time a team amongst the pre-tourney favourites won the cup, and it was the first time in a long time.

The FIFA world cup and the ICC world cup are incomparable. The FIFA world is a high-qulaity competition that is truely global, even and open to upsets. The same can't be said for the ICC world cup.


You're not comparing apples with apples.

It can be found in 120 countries.

Okay Josh, how about you write to the ACB and ask them to include the Netherands in the next VB seres?
Or better still, go to the Netherlands and see if you can pick up any improvements to your game form their expertise and heritage?

 

[marc71178]

Only about 30 countries are good at soccer, yet it's "global".

30 is a lot more than 8

Also any lower side can beat a higher side.

The 70th ranked Cricket team couldn't beat one of the top 8.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

There are too many teams because games take 5 days too play, and take a physical toll on players. It can be played only in favourable weather conditions. Tours require a large investment in time and money and the test circuit is already crowded. There is already enough quality cricket and contrast in styles, the game doesn't need any more for a while IMO.

You are quite right, but to be honest, no matter the quality of play, no matter the amazing feats of batsman and bowlers, I'm sure I'm not the only one who tires of seeing the same teams go around. Look, I don't see many disadvantages in having a larger stock of teams playing test cricket [unless they aren't up to standard, obviously]. Yes the games are long and take large tolls on the players, and the test calendar is crowded, but more teams != more crowded, we just wouldn't have to play every team every 2 years like we do now.

 

[luckyeddie]

Tenpin Bowling has a far more widespread appeal than cricket, baseball and handball added together.

 

[Steulen]

I voted yes because I think 20/20 cricket would be

a) short enough to fit into the schedule
b) random enough to make a good story when Favland gets beaten by Nohopia
c) Asian enough to provide the poor Indians and Pakistanis with some hope of an olympic medal
d) interesting enough to be more bearable to watch than synchronised diving, horse ballet, pistol shooting or American rounders, which are all fully qualified olympic 'sports'
e) novel enough to create new interest in unfancied countries suddenly qualifying for the Olympics. The Netherlands qualifying for the World Cup is completely ignored, the Netherlands qualifying for the Olympics would be a big story in the dutch media.

 

[Josh]

Or better still, go to the Netherlands and see if you can pick up any improvements to your game form their expertise and heritage?

I probably would