Should Cricket be at the Commonwealth games ?

[JASON]

I thought of getting the opinion of others on this forum on whether Cricket should be at the Commonwealth games .

IMO , it should . It could replace the Champions Trophy every 4 years ie Champions Trophy and Commonwealth games could alternate. It would increase the interest in Cricket in many of the commonwealth countries, which do not play Cricket at the highest level ATM, but who aspire to compete at elite level with the Test nations.

It would also help settle the unease of the BCCI with regard to participating in Champions Trophy every 2 years. (the chance to win Gold for India would be a huge incentive for the BCCI). The ICC may not like it though, because Champions Trophy serves as a money spinner for them and they would not want to lose out on TV rights, and other income they would be generating to go to Commonwealth games !!

I know it may also cause problems for Teams like West Indies who are a combination of several countries competing separately at Commonwealth games , but I wonder if the WI cricket Team can be designated as a combined nations Team .

Likewise England Team will be a combination team representing England and Wales , but I am sure they could still be designated as a special combination team for this sport only (come to think of it is there anyone from Wales in the current Team , since Simon Jones is out injured ? )

 

[Smudge]

I know it may also cause problems for Teams like West Indies who are a combination of several countries competing separately at Commonwealth games , but I wonder if the WI cricket Team can be designated as a combined nations Team .

Likewise England Team will be a combination team representing England and Wales , but I am sure they could still be designated as a special combination team for this sport only (come to think of it is there anyone from Wales in the current Team , since Simon Jones is out injured ? )

So you want the Commonwealth Games to change the rules of representing a nation just for cricket? What's the point?

 

[Matt79]

or they can play as their respetive countries - go Jamaica

 

[age_master]

yeah it would shut the WI down but it would still be good to have.

 

[Smudge]

And it has been at the Commonwealth Games before. It was a joke.

http://nz.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1998/OTHERS+ICC/CG1998/

With Commonwealth countries still maintaining a stranglehold on cricketing power for the most part, these Games promised to be in effect a preview to the World Cup next year. However only three Test sides are sending their best available teams - Australia, New Zealand and Zimbabwe. Of the others: England haven't sent a side at all; the West Indies is required to split into island nations, of which three are chosen (Antigua, Barbados and Jamaica); India, Pakistan, South Africa and Sri Lanka are sending weakened sides. Joining them and host nation Malaysia are the best five ICC Trophy qualifiers - Bangladesh, Kenya, Scotland, Canada and Northern Ireland (part of the ineligible Irish team).

 

[alternative]

IMO we should have them in the games, as a shorter version.. finish the game quick, i would go with 20/20..

 

[mavric41]

IMO we should have them in the games, as a shorter version.. finish the game quick, i would go with 20/20..

20/20 is NOT cricket. Its relationship to cricket is akin to that of touch football has with rugby league.

Cricket should not be *******ised to fit into a time format. The minimum should be 50 over matches.

To win a gold medal for a 20/20 game would be a joke and a slight to all the other sports.

 

[GotSpin]

20/20 defaintely. More appealing to the masses, and guarenteed to make an impact that way. Yeah 50 overs would be great fun, Australia vs North Ireland

 

[ohtani's jacket]

I can't see it working.

The beautiful thing about 7s is that the game is so short. It's a single venue and the tournament is over in two days... Even 20/20 would take the best part of the Commonwealth Games & require multiple venues (& for most host countries it's easier to convert a football field into a rugby field than prepare cricket pitches). Even the team sports that aren't an abbreviated form of the game -- Netball, field hockey, basketball -- are all played at the same venue.

 

[SJS]

There should be no Commonwealth games.

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

I can't see it working.

The beautiful thing about 7s is that the game is so short. It's a single venue and the tournament is over in two days... Even 20/20 would take the best part of the Commonwealth Games & require multiple venues (& for most host countries it's easier to convert a football field into a rugby field than prepare cricket pitches). Even the team sports that aren't an abbreviated form of the game -- Netball, field hockey, basketball -- are all played at the same venue.

Personally I saw 7s for the first time yesterday and thought it totally devalued rugby. What's the point of a game where some players are practically walking through the opposition, and getting two points for a conversion from about 10yds away?

No for me. Teams will never play their strongest side because of the packed international schedule, in some countries there will be no crowds, and some countries (West Indies) won't be able to compete.

In the Olympics, however, it is maybe more justified. It could be played in a 20 overs format, but with squad restrictions like the football. Each side could be allowed to field only three over-25s (who perhaps could not have played over 10 Tests/ODIs). The rest would be under-25s. Only problems with this are the stadia, and the lack of bums on seats.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I voted yes for a 20/20 comp. I don't see any reason why it need drag on for too long, over here we have the semis & the final of our comp all played on the one day.

There could even be an age restriction like for Association Football at The Olympics, say an under-21 or under-23 comp. Would seem to get around the problem of countries sending under-strength teams.

 

[luckyeddie]

Nude female cricket on pogo-sticks perhaps, but otherwise, no.

 

[Smudge]

Personally I saw 7s for the first time yesterday and thought it totally devalued rugby. What's the point of a game where some players are practically walking through the opposition, and getting two points for a conversion from about 10yds away?

Errrr, if anything, conversions in sevens are harder, because the players have to drop kick the ball rather than place kick. And the kicker can take the kick from as close or as far as they like in either sevens or 15s, as long as they're in line with where the try was scored.

 

[cpr]

There could even be an age restriction like for Association Football at The Olympics, say an under-21 or under-23 comp. Would seem to get around the problem of countries sending under-strength teams.

Exactly what i was thinking.

I reckon it should be in. Ok the olympics isnt the best place for it, as not many of the nations play to a decent level. But the commonwealth is a different thing entirely, a fair percentage of nations do play cricket to some degree of skill.

As for the 'Oh but Wales/small West Indian island/insert random country wouldnt be competitive'.... Well, unless they've been blessed with a very good sportsman in a particular field, they arnt really that competitive anyway, but still take part, because its an honour to represent the country, and theres always an outside chance it could go right. To say cricket shouldnt be considered because only the big guns will win is to say swimming should be out because Australia cleaned up last time, or Rugby 7's should be out due to NZ dominating. I'm sure plenty of Welsh cricketers would love to play at the commonwealth games, even though there not realistically expected to win.

Also, look at Henry Paul in the 7's. New Zealander, played for England. What to say this wouldnt happen in the cricket. I'm sure people like Maynard have played for Wales in the one dayers against England before (which incidently Wales aint done too bad in if i remember correctly). After 20 years playing in Wales, i'm sure he'd be honoured to do it at commonwealth level. Imagine if Gerraint Jones proudly appeared for Papua New Guinea?? Wouldnt that be a boost for the nation and the game as a whole? Players who have changed nation in order to be able to play test cricket, going back to their roots to improve the sports image and bring their home into the public eye (yeah yeah i know Jones probably sees himself as English through and through, but i'm romanticising it here.)

I think if the right attitude is taken by the the ICC, it could work.

It would rely on the ICC having a clue how to handle something though

 

[Pothas]

there is no need for the likes of Cricket or Football in tournamnets such as the Comonwealth games. They are never really taken seriously and as a result devalue the games as a whole.

 

[archie mac]

I would like to see a 20/20 knockout comp.

Steve Waugh was very positive about his CWG experience in his bio.

I certainly enjoyed the 7s but did not lose any sleep when the Aussies were cheated out

So imagine it would be the same for the cricket