How to popularize Cricket?

[laksh_01]

Seriously guys, Wats lacking for this sport to be popular? If U see even a sport like Rugby which is played in lesser number of Nations than Cricket is getting gud attention & support from all over the world where the second biggest sport (Cricket after Soccer) is not even knwn in most countries? Wats ICC missing here, pls give ur opinions?

[Noble One]

Cricket has always been a sport that is popular amongst the few. I don't see how that is going to change, or why it is all that necessary. If people don't enjoy the game, no matter how you market it will have little effect.

[jashan83]

ICC has taken good steps to spread it around. A WCL structure, Inter Continental Cup & Shield, Extended 20-20 World Cup. ICC should further strengthen this.

Also good steps like introduction to Asian Games and likely be an Olympic sport are also great actions which would help cricket.

Only areas where ICC needs to work is not be rigid on the Test League, 50 over CWC not to be kept 10 nation.

We should also realize that 20-20 is the future and not ignore it. Test Will be there for a long time but that will be for matured cricket nations. The new one will have 20-20 only

[Spark]

I don't want to be part of any "cricket" that is T20 only.

Just no.

[jashan83]

I recently studied the structure of World Rugby Unions and ICC. The Rugby union has given a lot of voting rights to the Emerging Nations. they have been bold enough to give 2015 World Cup to Japan. Even FIFA has been bold to give world cup to Russia and Qatar in 2018 and 2022.
ICC should be bold enough to let nations bid for 20-20 World Cup. The 2016 20-20 WC can be given to any of the nations like Nepal, Scotland, Malaysia, Ireland, Netherlands, Denmark, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Namibia, USA, Canada, Argentina, China. The condition for the bid should be that the government should be ready to support it. Also if the nation is small then it can be jointly given.

Once the bid has been decide by say 2011, then the next step should ICC and the local government immediately making a fund. This fund should be sufficient to build 4 decent stadiums in the nation (2 each if it is a joint bid). The work of the stadium should be over by 2013.
Parallel to this 4 steps would be taken

1. Since the host team would be participating hence from the fund give central contracts to atleast 30 players based on 4 Slabs-Slab A, B, C & D. The money should be competitive. 15 times per capita income of that country is decent enough. Check for your own country

2. Set up a local league structure immediately with 6 teams. Why 6 teams because that has lead to the best results.These 6 teams will have the Geography divided on a rationale of Population and Area to be covered. At start the level of clubs will be low but we have to develop it. If a present structure exists, modify it to match it. The Clubs will be provided with budget to give 40 Contracts.
All the central players will be part of the club which covers their city. However if an club does not have 2 Central Club players the central board will loan then 2 players one from Grade A or B and other from C or D.
This local league will be broadcast live on TV. Along with that the National Matches of the host will also be telecast live. Besides this as a contract with the channel ICC will provide Cricket to be covered. Other 50 overs and 20-20 matches of Test nations. In the other time old interesting matches will be shown.
Now the question on this will be why would any channel do that. The managing committee will enter into an agreement with the channel where they will cover the operating cost and guarantee minimum profits to the channel till the time no sponsors or advertisements are there. Once advertisements starts coming and operation costs are covered and minimum profit level are exceeded, ICC will have a sharing in profits. This channel will have the rights to cover the World Cup in the nation. The international broadcast will be still with the ICC.

3. Last but MOST IMPORTANT is these clubs will have fund to train coaches in local schools and introduce the game. Atleast 80% of the schools would have to be covered. Every 6 months the clubs will hold the school tournaments. The best of the students will be given scholarship to support their studies in return for min hours of cricket + Practice they would have to do as per contract. The best of the Students if good can be directly picked for the Clubs and contract offered to them.
Also the clubs would hold half yearly camps where local side will be invited to play a tournament or give trials and good players or potential players will be picked and contracts offered.

4. The last action would be marketing the event. This would include following steps
a. Advertisement on various channels from 2011 to 2016 that 20-20 WC is coming to the nation
b. Giant screens put at major cities which broadcasts the channels with which we have a contract
c. Various short program about cricket, its culture and how it is played across media, paper
d. Hiring one local celebrity as brand ambassador.

I know now the question on point 4 is that it would be very costly. It would be very costly in USA but if we look at a country say Nepal, Malaysia, Argentina or even China these costs can be easily covered.

By this way it is like ICC is investing and then taking out the returns. The total investment in a country would be easily recovered if the game picks up in the country. Meanwhile we will have high attention towards the game and it can pick up


Coming back on structure of ICC Presently in ICC structure they are 10 Permanent Members and 3 from Associate. Only test nations have a vote. In my view point it should change to provide voting right to both test teams as well as non test teams. Obviously the Test Teams can retain a majority of vote for themselves.

The voting right should be given to the teams in WCL Division 1,2&3 besides the Test Teams. Also all the 5 development bodies should have votes for themselves. So going by this the present structure would be along with votes in bracket would be

India-3
Pak-3
SL-3
BD-3
ACC-1
Afg-1
UAE-1
Oman-1
HK-1

Aus-3
NZ-3
EAP-1
PNG-1

Eng-3
ECC-1
Ire-1
Neth-1
Scot-1
Den-1
Italy-1

SA-3
Zim-3
ACA-1
Kenya-1
Nam-1
Ugan-1

WI-3
ACA-1
Can-1
Berm-1
USA-1

The present structure has power like this
Asia Block-40%
Eng, Aus Block-30%
African Block-20%
American Block-10%

In the new structure it will change but not majorly

Asia Block-33% (Down 7%)
Eng, Aus Block-33% (Up 3%)
African Block-20% (At Par)
American Block-14% (Up 4%)

This structure will make the Boards like BCCI,ECB, ACA, PCB to develop teams like Nepal, Malaysia,Jersey and other teams to come in the upper level of WCL for their own benefit

With the voting percentage of Asia decreasing and also presence of USA, Canada would be in a way supporting England, Australia.

Leaving all things apart this structure would help cricket prosper across the globe with 10 nation WC type proposal not coming.

[laksh_01]

Originally Posted by Spark

I don't want to be part of any "cricket" that is T20 only.

Just no.

But u gotta accept the fact that as people get busier they wont have time to concentrate in a game for 1 whole day. So T20 is Cricket's answer to compete with other sports too...

[marc71178]

Originally Posted by laksh_01

But u gotta accept the fact that as people get busier they wont have time to concentrate in a game for 1 whole day. So T20 is Cricket's answer to compete with other sports too...

Tell you what, do you a deal.

If we accept that T20 is the answer to spread it to the minor nations, you have to accept that the minor nations aren't very good and should by no means be competing with the Test nations until they can be competitive.

[M0rphin3]

Cheerleaders, imo.

[Blaze 18]

In a nutshell :

1) Rugy, football and tennis are quite easy to understand and follow, cricket is not.

2) Duration - an average football match lasts about an hour and forty-five minutes, a cricket match may last for as many as five days!

This post by Noble One hits the nail right on the head :

Originally Posted by Noble One

Cricket has always been a sport that is popular amongst the few. I don't see how that is going to change, or why it is all that necessary. If people don't enjoy the game, no matter how you market it will have little effect.

[jashan83]

Originally Posted by Blaze 18

In a nutshell :

1) Rugy, football and tennis are quite easy to understand and follow, cricket is not.

2) Duration - an average football match lasts about an hour and forty-five minutes, a cricket match may last for as many as five days!

This post by Noble One hits the nail right on the head :

A beginning of this century every game had it's pockets. There was no global sports.

Then Football picked up to be the no one game. Tennis also picked up.

Now Rugby is threatening. Rugby is not at all easy. It was hard for me to pick up. During commonwealth it was hard to explain it to other people too.

Then in Cricket
England:- At one time no doubt was the no 1 game, but now football surely is. Cricket is not dead. Has picked up recently. But at one time I had even heard that young people play football, oldies enjoy Cricket.
South Africa:- Football and Rugby have fast picked up in the black population. They don't prefer cricket. This is because of open policies of Rugby Union
West Indies:- It was always suggested that other games like Basketball, football, even baseball are picking up when west indies was in power. At that time it was ignored. Now West Indies is one of the weakest Test Teams
New Zealand:- Rugby was always dominant. Cricket was never no 1 sport. But it has further been marginalized. Look at state of the Kiwi's. Loosing 4-0 to Bd and now 3-0 down already to India.
Pakistan:- Cricket is the No 1 sport. It will remain. but the political situation is not allowing the fans to see Pakistan Team Play. If it becomes a long thing then who knows interest decreases. After all PCB is also not very good financially. This forces players to go towards other things like bookies etc.
Zimbabwe:- It was a game played by Whites. When Administration went against Whites, the strength of team fell like anything. I do not know when they will be back to old times

So whether Football is easy or Cricket is Difficult, it is always better to spread the game ass it mitigates the risk. Even baseball is difficult but slowly it became one of the top games in USA, Cuba, Haiti, Dominicia, Belize, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Philippines and many more.Rugby was no where. But with the efforts of IRB it has spread to many nations,

Cricket has an Advantage of having so many forms. The 20-20 is a vehicle to introduce a game for a new audience. It is fast and will help in the game developing. Slowly over time when the game is at some level then the nation is ready for Test match.

The greatest personal example I had seen was wen in a flight I met an American Gentlemen. We talked on sports. He said he got introduced to cricket through IPL. He liked the game. Then over time he followed cricket. He said ultimately he started liking Test Matches. He went to see ashes at Lords.

So cricket may be difficult in the start but is very interesting. It is in the very interest of the game to spread it. otherwise soon I ll be bored of Ind Playing Aus, Eng & Pak. The rest of the test teams would already be boring, then better switch to IPL or other sports.

[laksh_01]

Originally Posted by jashan83

A beginning of this century every game had it's pockets. There was no global sports.

Then Football picked up to be the no one game. Tennis also picked up.

Now Rugby is threatening. Rugby is not at all easy. It was hard for me to pick up. During commonwealth it was hard to explain it to other people too.

Then in Cricket
England:- At one time no doubt was the no 1 game, but now football surely is. Cricket is not dead. Has picked up recently. But at one time I had even heard that young people play football, oldies enjoy Cricket.
South Africa:- Football and Rugby have fast picked up in the black population. They don't prefer cricket. This is because of open policies of Rugby Union
West Indies:- It was always suggested that other games like Basketball, football, even baseball are picking up when west indies was in power. At that time it was ignored. Now West Indies is one of the weakest Test Teams
New Zealand:- Rugby was always dominant. Cricket was never no 1 sport. But it has further been marginalized. Look at state of the Kiwi's. Loosing 4-0 to Bd and now 3-0 down already to India.
Pakistan:- Cricket is the No 1 sport. It will remain. but the political situation is not allowing the fans to see Pakistan Team Play. If it becomes a long thing then who knows interest decreases. After all PCB is also not very good financially. This forces players to go towards other things like bookies etc.
Zimbabwe:- It was a game played by Whites. When Administration went against Whites, the strength of team fell like anything. I do not know when they will be back to old times

So whether Football is easy or Cricket is Difficult, it is always better to spread the game ass it mitigates the risk. Even baseball is difficult but slowly it became one of the top games in USA, Cuba, Haiti, Dominicia, Belize, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Philippines and many more.Rugby was no where. But with the efforts of IRB it has spread to many nations,

Cricket has an Advantage of having so many forms. The 20-20 is a vehicle to introduce a game for a new audience. It is fast and will help in the game developing. Slowly over time when the game is at some level then the nation is ready for Test match.

The greatest personal example I had seen was wen in a flight I met an American Gentlemen. We talked on sports. He said he got introduced to cricket through IPL. He liked the game. Then over time he followed cricket. He said ultimately he started liking Test Matches. He went to see ashes at Lords.

So cricket may be difficult in the start but is very interesting. It is in the very interest of the game to spread it. otherwise soon I ll be bored of Ind Playing Aus, Eng & Pak. The rest of the test teams would already be boring, then better switch to IPL or other sports.

Spot on Jashan. Perfect answer according to me. Lots & lots of fans & administrators should start being broad minded & think out of the box.

[Daemon]

Cricket would be ****ing popular if the US was any good at it

[jashan83]

Originally Posted by Daemon

Cricket would be ****ing popular if the US was any good at it

US is not the only place in the world. there are 242 nations and just 24 are test nations (West indies is a group of 15 nations for knowledge of all). ****ing USA had to pick up football coz whole world played it. Similarly we will have to have ***ing whole world playing it so that US picks up.
We have to get over our ****ing attitude that just Eng, Aus have the right to decide what happens in cricket and other nations who appreciate other forms beside Tests are ****ing loosers.

Grow up. See what we are discussing. US was not at all discussed. And come to terms with the new reality.

[Daemon]

Originally Posted by jashan83

We have to get over our ****ing attitude that just Eng, Aus have the right to decide what happens in cricket and other nations who appreciate other forms beside Tests are ****ing loosers.

eh...no one really has that attitude. It's just that no one wants to see an overkill of T20 such that the number and quality of tests reduce.

And that US thing was meant to be taken lightheartedly

[jashan83]

Originally Posted by Daemon

eh...no one really has that attitude. It's just that no one wants to see an overkill of T20 such that the number and quality of tests reduce.

And that US thing was meant to be taken lightheartedly

. US due to it's economy will always be important dude and equally challenging too