Parmi | #1 draft pick | Jake King is **** | Big Bash League tipping champion of the universeCome and Paint Turtle
Cricket Web's current Premier League Tipping Champion
- As featured in The Independent.
"I don't think that they'll come close to us to be honest."
- Steve Smith before the Ashes
NRL thread going off aws.
I'm in the group that believes that the sports in the Olympics should be those that treat the Games as the pinnacle of their sport. Therefore, as much as I'd like to see cricket on the global stage, I don't think it should be in the Olympics.
Bit harsh on golf as it's not in the Olympics until 2016.
Golf's not a sport, its a recreational thing for people who play sport.
#J.Hobbs; #L.Hutton; #D.Bradman; #V.Richards; #G.Sobers; #A.Border; #A.Gilchrist; #K.Miller; #I.Khan; #S.Warne; #M.Marshall;
TBF to Tennis and Golf, individual sports tend to take the Olympics seriously. Murray would give anything to join Nadal, Federer, Agassi, Kafelnikov, Becker and Edberg who can claim singles/doubles golds. I'd presume the Golf players will feel the same.
Team sports dont quite feel the same to me in tearms of individual determination.
Cricket, yes for Commonwealth, probably not for Olympics. Only a handful of nations can play at a decent level - Unless it takes the Football line of u23 comp, or like boxing amateurs only.
Mind you, if Basketball can be in despite it being a one nation sport....
"All are lunatics, but he who can analyze his delusions is called a philosopher." - Ambrose Bierce
Langeveldt: I of course blame their parents.. and unchecked immigration!
GingerFurball: He's Austrian, they tend to produce the odd ****ed up individual
Burgey: Be careful dealing with neighbours whose cars don't have wheels but whose houses do.
Uppercut: Maybe I just need better strippers
True, but he can't do that at this moment in time, so he'll focus on winning the Olympics.
Just because its not Wimbledon, doesn't mean he, or any of the others, are treating it like a minor tournament. If it was a minor tourney, they probably wouldn't compete, given how much they complain about the schedule being overcrowded/too many comps etc... One look at the roll call shows the big names come to the Olympics to win.
Anything that raises the profile of cricket is good IMO. Especially if the comp. is won by a country that needs a 'booster' like the West Indies.
Also, if stuff like javelin catching and womens face-painting can make it to the Olympics with a global following of about 12 people then I see no reason why a sport followed by 100s of millions of people shouldn't be included on principle.
01. Victor Trumper 02. Warren Bardsley 03. Clem Hill 04. Charlie Macartney 05. Warwick Armstrong 06. Monty Noble 07. George Giffen 08. Hugh Trumble 09. Jack Blackham 10. Fred Spofforth 11. Ernie Jones
01. Jack Hobbs 02. WG Grace 03. Kumar Ranjitsinhji 04. Johnny Tyldesley 05. Frank Woolley 06. Stanley Jackson 07. Frank Foster 08. Arthur Lilley 09. George Lohmann 10. Tom Richardson 11. Sydney Barnes
There is zero chance that the olympics would abandon sports like basketball, tennis or even its seriously second-rate football tournament.
Its only a question of time before they will want cricket included. Cricket is far too big and rich to keep out and with T20 things have really changed. Especially in many smaller countries. The year England launched T20 at the highest level there were 14 teams playing in singapore, now there are more than 100. T20 have seriously changed things. I think established cricket countries tend to forget just how absurd the idea of an 8- hour ball game sounds to others. Now that huge problem is out of the way
also, olympic recognition matters quite a lot in many places when it comes to funding.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)