Cricket for the Olympics?

[James]

Cricket for the Olympics?

 

[Speersy]

I'mm all for it, thought do you think the players would take it seriously?
Probably just another excuse to play 20/20 cricket, more money for the ICC and IOC.

 

[The Sean]

I've got no problem with Twenty20 being at the Olympics, as long as it was promoted to the rest of the world as "Twenty20" and not as "cricket".

Seriously though, I've always been of the opinion that the main criteria for an Olympic sport should be one for which winning an Olympic gold medal is the highest honour possible. This isn't the case for cricket (or even Twenty20, for that matter).

 

[JASON]

I think its a good idea and a great way of promoting Cricket to other countries .(outside the top 20 countries I mean)

 

[umop 3p!sdn]

Meh I'm not really for it to be honest.

 

[Richard]

I've got no problem with Twenty20 being at the Olympics, as long as it was promoted to the rest of the world as "Twenty20" and not as "cricket".

Seriously though, I've always been of the opinion that the main criteria for an Olympic sport should be one for which winning an Olympic gold medal is the highest honour possible. This isn't the case for cricket (or even Twenty20, for that matter).

Absolutely on both counts.

 

[GIMH]

I've got no problem with Twenty20 being at the Olympics, as long as it was promoted to the rest of the world as "Twenty20" and not as "cricket".

Seriously though, I've always been of the opinion that the main criteria for an Olympic sport should be one for which winning an Olympic gold medal is the highest honour possible. This isn't the case for cricket (or even Twenty20, for that matter).

Agree. That's why they shouldn't have footy in it either.

 

[biased indian]

Agree. That's why they shouldn't have footy in it either.

and a few more other sports.....

 

[armchairumpire]

Great idea. Aussies are so interested in the medal count at the Olympics. Does that count as 12 gold medals?

 

[stumpski]

Didn't they play 50-overs matches at the Commonwealth Games a few years ago? They counted as full ODIs as well IIRC. An experiment that doesn't seem to have been repeated.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I wouldn't mind if it were played as an "exhibition sport", which would spread the word about the game.

 

[silentstriker]

I don't see a downside in having a 20/20 competition in the Olympics. It would be televised to countries who normally don't get cricket, and I don't see what bad could come from that.

 

[Craig]

Didn't they play 50-overs matches at the Commonwealth Games a few years ago? They counted as full ODIs as well IIRC. An experiment that doesn't seem to have been repeated.

Actually I don't think they were. I spoke to a guy from KL about 4 years ago and he said since the Commonwealth Games in '98 the grounds had been bulldozed.

 

[PhoenixFire]

No thanks, just another chance for Australia to humiliate everyone else. Although the idea of thrashing America sure is tempting..........

 

[Richard]

Didn't they play 50-overs matches at the Commonwealth Games a few years ago? They counted as full ODIs as well IIRC. An experiment that doesn't seem to have been repeated.

Actually I don't think they were. I spoke to a guy from KL about 4 years ago and he said since the Commonwealth Games in '98 the grounds had been bulldozed.

Nah, they weren't. An understrength South Africa beat a full-strength Australia, tho, so it was a treasured moment nonetheless.

 

[James]

As the ICC have said, Twenty20 is the future of international cricket so it's something that is going to have to accepted. A poll on Cricket Web a few months back that gained over 4,000 votes polled as follows:

What is your favourite form of the game?

Test cricket
26%
ODI cricket
39%
Twenty20 cricket
33%
Domestic cricket
2%

I'm all for it, especially as it's likely to get further countries interested in the sports, and the public interest in the concept is massive judging by things like crowd numbers

 

[chaminda_00]

Didn't they play 50-overs matches at the Commonwealth Games a few years ago? They counted as full ODIs as well IIRC. An experiment that doesn't seem to have been repeated.

Actually I don't think they were. I spoke to a guy from KL about 4 years ago and he said since the Commonwealth Games in '98 the grounds had been bulldozed.

Nah, they weren't. An understrength South Africa beat a full-strength Australia, tho, so it was a treasured moment nonetheless.

Ended up not getting List A status as well, due the large amount of understrength sides.

 

[Richard]

As the ICC have said, Twenty20 is the future of international cricket so it's something that is going to have to accepted. A poll on Cricket Web a few months back that gained over 4,000 votes polled as follows:

What is your favourite form of the game?

Test cricket
26%
ODI cricket
39%
Twenty20 cricket
33%
Domestic cricket
2%

I'm all for it, especially as it's likely to get further countries interested in the sports, and the public interest in the concept is massive judging by things like crowd numbers

Yeah I think I posted something on that (was in TF IIRR as it was pretty irrelevant like) saying it was rather alarming.

TBH, though, it's well-known that Tests are the favoured form by most of those who really matter. I've barely seen so much as a single forum poster who's said something>Tests. And far more than not tend to say ODIs>T20Is too, it's mostly just English optimists that feel otherwise, something that may well change as we start to lose T20Is regularly and, possibly, the sheen gets rubbed-off at domestic level by overuse.

It'd also be interesting, if possible, to see the breakdown of the location of the votes. If not, we could just have a breakdown of location of CW visitors which would enable a rough guess.

 

[jcoops]

There are advantages and disavantages to this idea.

The advantages
The Olympics is world-wide so it could result in more countrys getting into the game, Also having this idea could produce more talented players, and of course i love watching any old cricket.

Disadvantages
How long have u got? Most of the players that do go into the olympics will not be profesionals.As a lot of players have to work all year round, And as cricket is really only popular to about 12 countries there might actually not many countries entering the competiton.Venues.Countries that host into the olympics might not actaully like the sport so they might not have any venues.

 

[biased indian]

There are advantages and disavantages to this idea.

The advantages
The Olympics is world-wide so it could result in more countrys getting into the game, Also having this idea could produce more talented players, and of course i love watching any old cricket.

Disadvantages
How long have u got? Most of the players that do go into the olympics will not be profesionals.As a lot of players have to work all year round, And as cricket is really only popular to about 12 countries there might actually not many countries entering the competiton.Venues.Countries that host into the olympics might not actaully like the sport so they might not have any venues.

hockey has been in olympics for ages and its still the 6-7 country who always play the medal round....

cricket is better of not in olympics.....