After watching many type of sports at the almost concluding Olympics at Beijing last few weeks, I was thinking what would it take to bring the game of cricket to it. It took a long while to bring in baseball to the Olympics and only because it had the big names in it.
Big names being USA, Japan, China
[Chinese Taipei], which had good teams of baseball so it would have been good chances to get Gold. If one sees the medals table you only see, China, USA, Korea are basically the usual countries at the top. It seems only games that involve at least a little majority of the same countries make it to the Olympics so that they could not lose out on Gold.
So in that stance, cricket is way behind.
But there is another line of thought also. The game was just too long for the public to keep their attention. No sport at the Olympics takes longer than 2 hours and even those you can count on your fingers. The game of cricket in the 50-over format takes a good 8-9 hours. The 20-20 format might just be the answer to it.
Even though most of my readers know, I have not been in full favour of the respective format as I believe in the sanctity of the classical game but its still very sell-able. It attracts a mass audience and definitely can be a contender for the Olympics.
With the next Olympics to be held at one of the Hubs of Cricket, London, the average cricket fan can think and wish for the seemingly impossible at the moment. Can Cricket make it to the London Olympics in 2012?
i hope they will include cricket for the next Olympics.. i really want to see Pakistan to get at least a medal because i do not think Pakistan will be able to get any medals in hockey in coming years or so..
ReplyDelete@jawwad - hehhe...that was what I was thinking also deep down inside...hehe...
ReplyDeleteHey, Lets try get close to the medals in any of the 28 odd sports out there...its sad for the whole subcontinent to pin hopes on 1 single sport ...btw how many times did we win the World Cup ??
ReplyDelete@yakub L - finally a comment from you mate...heheh...well to add to that...I dont think even cricket can get us a medal...hehe...but there is no harm having more of a chance...
ReplyDeleteIf politics were a sport...we could easily win all 3 medals...
It is possible that cricket will eventually be represented at the Olympics by T20. That solves most of the limitations associated with it.
ReplyDeleteHowever, from a personal point of view, cricket at The Games will simply not be olympics.
Most, not all, of the games at the olympics have the four-year event as their pinnacle of their sport/field of excellence. It isn't so for cricket, just as it isn't for football or tennis.
Hockey is different for Olympics still is the apex of achievement.
Then, T20 isn't really what stands for cricket, and excellence in cricket - test cricket decides that.
So I don't know...Olympics could be bloated by including all human sporting endeavors...but most will look at the columns in Athletics, swimming and the like to see who did well at the games.
I think the 20-20 version has a good chance...especially in the London Olympics...but first the ICC needs to resolve the million issues on its plate before it can start lobbying for cricket...
ReplyDeleteBy the way Jaccque Rogge just made it public that there is no chance till 2016..boo hoo hoo
ReplyDelete