Should Cricket be an Olympic Event?

[Green Leopard]

I don't think cricket should be in the Olympics, and similarly I don't think Football, Hockey, Basketball, Rugby (in 2016), and Tennis should be in the Olympics.

All these sports have their own premier world events and don't really need exposure.

[Amjid Javed]

Dont think cricket should be at olympics, however if it was maybe a 20-20 format would be best.

[KingKhanWC]

No. No need to ruin cricket further. Olympics should reduce sports.

[withlovefrom vizag]

if english officials try hard,cricket will definitely find a place in Olympics.....
Cricket is way better than ping pong!

I cant stop laughing seeing table tennis played in doubles,mixed doubles also

[ads101]

Yes. But there's a big problem with major sports in the olympics. They're not treated properly, the best players aren't at show. Teams don't send out their best teams. Which means few care about the major sports at the olympics e.g. football. Need to field the strongest teams.

T20 format should be good in my opinion. Though perhaps in order to speed things up a world cup qualifier for cricke could be used.

[Gone]

Cricket Should be made part of the olympics, t20 format is not long and it will also help attract people to Cricket, more over it will also help improve the infastructure in alot of countries esp US and China who dont want to miss out on the Gold for any events :p

The market is not low for Cricket, although majority will be from SC countries like INdia, Pak, SL, Bang, that is still huge.

[Markhor]

I think there are a number of positives from having cricket at the Olympics.

Every city that hosts the Olympics has to build venues for each sport. This would mean that a potential host city in a non-test nation for an Olympic Games would have to prepare at least one, possibly more, international standard cricket ground. The people from that nation can use those cricketing facilities.

Development of the sport is another positive. A host country usually enters a team for every event, and cricket would be no exception. The IOC also helps with the development of the group of competitors for the sport, which could mean a lot of money for an underfunded associate or affiliate member of the ICC.

The cricketers would also get more exposure. A cricketer can talk all he likes about how many first-class runs he's scored, how many List A wickets he has, or how many ODIs he has played, but that means nothing to a non-cricket fan. But to be able to say he (or she) has taken part in the Olympics would instantly be recognised. In addition, as most TV coverage in each participating country covers each sport their country takes part in to some extent, cricket would gain more exposure to people who may not have been aware of cricket in their country.

However there are also a number of issues such as player eligibility.

Cricket, despite what some people seem to think, has some of the strictest eligibility rules of international sport. The Olympics has some of the weakest. See, for example, the several Kenyans who now run for Middle East countries, or Sonia O'Sullivan being eligible to run for Ireland in the 2008 Olympics despite running for Australia in the 2006 Commonwealth Games. In short, a player who is eligible to represent a country in the Olympics may not be eligible to represent the same country in international cricket run by the ICC.

Also you have the different countries that participate in the Olympics. The countries that take part in the Olympics are not the same as the countries that take part in international cricket. The West Indies would have to play separately from each other, England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man would all have to compete together as one team. There are other examples. Athletes from Northern Ireland are able to chose to represent the Republic of Ireland if they so wish, but whether all Northern Irish cricketers would be comfortable with this is another matter entirely. The recent debates over the entry of a UK team for the 2012 Olympic football team should be looked at here.

Is there enough room in the international cricket calendar for another tournament? In addition, it is highly likely that the tournament would take place during the English home season, making the ECB not exactly keen on taking part. The answer here could be to copy the Olympic football tournament and play an Under-23 (with three overage players) tournament.

However I think the increase exposure cricket would receive from participating in the Olympics will negate these concerns.

[ads101]

Originally Posted by Gone Cricket Should be made part of the olympics, t20 format is not long and it will also help attract people to Cricket, more over it will also help improve the infastructure in alot of countries esp US and China who dont want to miss out on the Gold for any events :p The market is not low for Cricket, although majority will be from SC countries like INdia, Pak, SL, Bang, that is still huge.

I swear cricket's supposed to be the second biggest sport in the world after football.

And china wants to get into cricket soon too. Afterall they've got their own cricket stadiums now I believe. Plus unlike football, international competition is the highest form of competition. So cricketers are likely to treat olympic cricket very seriously.

[Markhor]

Originally Posted by Gone more over it will also help improve the infastructure in alot of countries esp US and China who dont want to miss out on the Gold for any events :p

Agreed, I mentioned in a previous post that every city that hosts the Olympics has to build venues for each sport. This would mean that a potential host city in a non-test nation for an Olympic Games would have to prepare at least one, possibly more, international standard cricket ground. The people from that nation can use those cricketing facilities.

Development of the sport is another positive. A host country usually enters a team for every event, and cricket would be no exception. The IOC also helps with the development of the group of competitors for the sport, which could mean a lot of money for an underfunded associate or affiliate member of the ICC.

[Space Cat]

I'll never say never but in its current form Cricket should not be in the Olympics. No way it would work and it doesn't belong there anyway.

Of the Top cricket nations only England and Australia are capable of hosting an Olympics. Any other city would have to spend millions to host cricket matches that barely anybody will attend or care about. The sport is also far too complicated for casual viewers.

They also need to remove these pro sports and team sports like Football, basketball and tennis.

[Jo_Don]

Originally Posted by Space Cat They also need to remove these pro sports and team sports like Football, basketball and tennis.

Or for team sports, award one medal per player, each of which counts towards the final medal tally. It's pointless hosting lengthy team tournaments, only for one medal to be added to the tally at the end of it all.

IMO this will cause countries to take the team sports more seriously, and may even assist in popularising sports such as cricket and hockey in countries that do not traditionally play them. You can't deny a sport with a global viewership of 2 billion+, yet allow non-events like beach volleyball.

[LastLaugh_PK]

Originally Posted by Markhor Also you have the different countries that participate in the Olympics. The countries that take part in the Olympics are not the same as the countries that take part in international cricket. The West Indies would have to play separately from each other, England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man would all have to compete together as one team.

Very very valid point.. Each of the countries that form the West Indies are not capable of sending their own individual teams.. plus there is no England in the Olympics.. There is only Great Britain comprising of all the countries and territories you mentioned..

[freelance_cricketer]

Wouldn't mind a medal.

[LastLaugh_PK]

Originally Posted by freelance_cricketer Wouldn't mind a medal.

India winning a t20 tournament?

[cricket_crazy]

Cricket needs exposure and olympics serves as a platform to advertise cricket. I don't see why not?

[freelance_cricketer]

Originally Posted by LastLaugh_PK India winning a t20 tournament?

hehe anything can happen. nobody gave us a chance in 2007 now that we've been written off again, expect another.

[thair9999]

Please sign the Petition, may be it will be included next time, once enough people sign. Please share with your friends as well.

Here is link for Petition. Click here to sign

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/cricket-in-olympics/

[Intruder]

I can't believe cricket isn't in the olympics yet! Its one of the most popular sports on the planet!
Besides, it would probably be our only chance to ever get a gold.. LOL

[shafkath]

Intruder brothet you are right but surely its too late now, the olympics have already started what are we gna do

[Intruder]

Shafkath I'm not a genius or anything but I assume the petition is for the next olympics?
Whilst we're at it, why not try get kabbadi in the olympics too! 2 medals then perhaps?

[shafkath]

Aaah i see, so were plannig for four years ahead, i believe kabbadi would be quite something special espesially in chappals

[LastLaugh_PK]

Forget about it.. Whichever sport America does not compete in does not get an approval.. Don't know how they allowed field hockey though..

[mahad193]

I'd like to see cricket in the Olympics, but I think even Twenty20 cricket would be too long a format and would not be appealing to other non-test playing nations, let alone Test and ODI cricket.

A format like that of the Hong Kong sixes, or even Double Wicket cricket, would be a good idea, and more non-test playing nations would find such a format much more attractive. Plus, at max. one match would last no longer than an hour, which is perfect for the Olympics.

Twenty20s, ODIs, and Tests however, are a complete no no for the Olympics in my opinion.

[thair9999]

Originally Posted by LastLaugh_PK Forget about it.. Whichever sport America does not compete in does not get an approval.. Don't know how they allowed field hockey though..

Because they have A Women Team playing

[AamchiMumbaikar]

Seriously...

They have Baseball, Judo, Taekwando & all but no Chess, Kabaddi, Cricket, Pool,.......

May be few countries should threaten to boycott next games if IOA doesn't listen. ENG, AUS, NZ & SA should also be united and raise a strong voice for next Olympics.

[Usman]

Originally Posted by Intruder I can't believe cricket isn't in the olympics yet! Its one of the most popular sports on the planet! Besides, it would probably be our only chance to ever get a gold.. LOL

You do realise Pakistan is a 3 time Olymic hockey champion right?

Originally Posted by AamchiMumbaikar Seriously... They have Baseball, Judo, Taekwando & all but no Chess, Kabaddi, Cricket, Pool,....... May be few countries should threaten to boycott next games if IOA doesn't listen. ENG, AUS, NZ & SA should also be united and raise a strong voice for next Olympics.

Chess??? Pool??? Whilst we're at it, lets make watching TV an Olympic "sport".

[withlovefrom vizag]

i dont understand the reason why Poms are not trying hard to include cricket in olympics.It is their traditional,truly English sport.

[Gotham Cronie]

Originally Posted by AamchiMumbaikar Seriously... They have Baseball, Judo, Taekwando & all but no Chess, Kabaddi, Cricket, Pool,....... May be few countries should threaten to boycott next games if IOA doesn't listen. ENG, AUS, NZ & SA should also be united and raise a strong voice for next Olympics.

Baseball is not in the Olympics.

[Swaraj!!]

I would beg to disagree. What would be the format for Olympics. 50 over would be too long and the series would go on for a month or so. There wouldnt be enough stadiums to make it faster while catering to the crowds.

Tests - impossible to schedule.

20-20, I personally would hate something as significant as an Olympic medal to be determined based on a hit-and-giggle form of the match.

It's worse than the 3 set version of tennis we see in Olympics. By the time you whet your appetite, your game is over.

IMO, and it's just my opinion, unless you can do justice to the value of the medal, you should'nt drag Cricket into the Olympic mix.

On the other hand, to add in Cricket, you can set up qualifiers way ahead of the actual games and only hold QF onwards during the games.

[Green Leopard]

Originally Posted by Swaraj!! I would beg to disagree. What would be the format for Olympics. 50 over would be too long and the series would go on for a month or so. There wouldnt be enough stadiums to make it faster while catering to the crowds. Tests - impossible to schedule. 20-20, I personally would hate something as significant as an Olympic medal to be determined based on a hit-and-giggle form of the match. It's worse than the 3 set version of tennis we see in Olympics. By the time you whet your appetite, your game is over. IMO, and it's just my opinion, unless you can do justice to the value of the medal, you should'nt drag Cricket into the Olympic mix. On the other hand, to add in Cricket, you can set up qualifiers way ahead of the actual games and only hold QF onwards during the games.

Then, scrap the World T20, and play only at Olympics. It would get higher profile and spread the game quicker.

But with the incompetents at ICC we have this is unlikely to happen.

[ahamedirshad123]

Not sure about cricket, but Sepak Takraw should be included

[AamchiMumbaikar]

Originally Posted by Usman You do realise Pakistan is a 3 time Olymic hockey champion right? Chess??? Pool??? Whilst we're at it, lets make watching TV an Olympic "sport".

May be you don't consider Chess, Pool n all as interesting sports but they are a lot more popular & require better skill + concentration. Even Squash is not there in Olympics!

They should include as many games as possible (around 50) so that every country has a fair chance @ winning GOLD

[sada90]

yeh all game i see on CTV are lame swimming games'

[RWAC]

Go for it. Even if it's T20 to begin with, it would give exposure to the sport.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[waqar goraya]

If WATER POLO can be part of Olympics then there is nothing left in the world which is rejected on globalization and credibility grounds...

[AFG_Brit]

i read somewhere once that cricket will be included in olympics around 2020 and it will be the twenty20 format.

[AdidasBeard]

If cricket was in the olympics then the biggest effect would be to the Women's game. As all medals count equally governing bodies would be forced to spend more money and attention on developing the women's game. Once there was a chance of a medal fans would start tuning into it too.

There would be more international teams as the West Indies would be broken into T&T, Jamaica, Guyana, Barbados etc... England would compete as Great Britain and Ireland as the Republic of Ireland.

[Executioner]

I think cricket should be included.

I know cricket is the 2nd most popular sports, has world cups, this that. But the Olympic committee should think about it. If cricket was included there will be more following for the olympics because cricket fans will be interested in their teams, esp. the subcontinental fans. More viewers = More money

I dont really see much interest in the olympics among general people. Even the football matches dont have much following because of the lack of star players. And the others sports? Ill be suprised to see an ordinary person who is prepared to follow sports like discus throwing, javelin, swimming, etc online.

[AdidasBeard]

Originally Posted by Executioner I think cricket should be included. I know cricket is the 2nd most popular sports, has world cups, this that. But the Olympic committee should think about it. If cricket was included there will be more following for the olympics because cricket fans will be interested in their teams, esp. the subcontinental fans. More viewers = More money I dont really see much interest in the olympics among general people. Even the football matches dont have much following because of the lack of star players. And the others sports? Ill be suprised to see an ordinary person who is prepared to follow sports like discus throwing, javelin, swimming, etc online.

Can't speak for Bangladesh but Olympics has been massive in Britain aslong as I can remember, only thing that equals it in hype is the football world cup. Cricket would not effect interest in the games one way or the other.

[Executioner]

Originally Posted by AdidasBeard Can't speak for Bangladesh but Olympics has been massive in Britain aslong as I can remember, only thing that equals it in hype is the football world cup. Cricket would not effect interest in the games one way or the other.

well actually sports like i mentioned are more popular in 1st world countries/European countries when you compare to the poor countries Asia. Bringing cricket in will raise the interest levels in the olympics thats the way i see it

[AdidasBeard]

Originally Posted by Executioner well actually sports like i mentioned are more popular in 1st world countries/European countries when you compare to the poor countries Asia. Bringing cricket in will raise the interest levels in the olympics thats the way i see it

mmm I'm not convinced by the idea of poor countries not being involved in the olympics. You can't get more egalitarian than running and nations like Ethiopia, Kenya and Jamaica manage to succeed in that. Other Asian nations manage to dominate in sports like badminton, table tennis, wrestling, weighlifting. There is already hockey in the olympics which is very popular amongst South Asian nations. Perhaps the answer is for South Asian nations such to put more money and effort in to developing sports other than cricket.

[LastLaugh_PK]

They have absurd sports like beach volleyball but no cricket

[AdidasBeard]

Originally Posted by LastLaugh_PK They have absurd sports like beach volleyball but no cricket

I agree with you re Beach Volleyball, but I believe most sports in there deserve to be in there. The idea is that sports with little coverage get chance to shine. Cricket has a world cup, world t2o cup (no test match championship yet) so I cant really see too much justification for cricket. Although it would have a great effect on the women's game.

[LastLaugh_PK]

Originally Posted by AdidasBeard I agree with you re Beach Volleyball, but I believe most sports in there deserve to be in there. The idea is that sports with little coverage get chance to shine. Cricket has a world cup, world t2o cup (no test match championship yet) so I cant really see too much justification for cricket. Although it would have a great effect on the women's game.

No sport in the world gets more exposure than football/soccer still it is a part of the Olympics..

As I said earlier.. any sport in which America does not compete in stands no chance of being included in the olympics.

[AdidasBeard]

Originally Posted by LastLaugh_PK No sport in the world gets more exposure than football/soccer still it is a part of the Olympics.. As I said earlier.. any sport in which America does not compete in stands no chance of being included in the olympics.

Football and the olympics has always been an awkward mix, the used to insist all players were amateur so it was dominated by communist nations, now it has a strange rules for age qualification.

I dont agree with your America argument, they have no more influence in the Olympics than Russia or China. The last event to be dropped from the olympics was softball and you cant get much more American than that. There are plenty of sports which the Americans have very little influence, Badminton, table tennis, amateur boxing. With many of the other sports I think America target these sports with funding programmes so they can win as many medals as possible for reasons of national pride and propaganda. The Chinese, British, Russians etc do the same. India for one has the resources to do the same, but rightly or wrongly chooses not to.

[ace58]

Don't know why they haven't started already. The subcontinental teams would send their best player for sure, as would the west indian countries and that might motivate australia new zealand and great britain to do the same. the competition would be good unlike Olympic baseball or football, and not one sided like basketball, badminton, or ping pong. It would be good for cricket and the Olympics.

[Space Cat]

Originally Posted by Jo_Don Or for team sports, award one medal per player, each of which counts towards the final medal tally. It's pointless hosting lengthy team tournaments, only for one medal to be added to the tally at the end of it all. IMO this will cause countries to take the team sports more seriously, and may even assist in popularising sports such as cricket and hockey in countries that do not traditionally play them. You can't deny a sport with a global viewership of 2 billion+, yet allow non-events like beach volleyball.

You can and should if its not the pinnacle event of the sport. Why should the Olympics be used as a development tournament?

[Markhor]

Originally Posted by Green Leopard Then, scrap the World T20, and play only at Olympics. It would get higher profile and spread the game quicker. But with the incompetents at ICC we have this is unlikely to happen.

You could have the World T20 at the Olympics every four years but the ICC have run the World T20 into the ground - and have totally devalued World Cups.

We are going to have 4 World Cups in 3 years by the end of 2012.

We've had the 2009 T20 World Cup.
The 2010 T20 World Cup - which was only nine months or so after the previous one.

The 2011 50 over World Cup, and now we are going to have the 2012 T20 World Cup.

50 over World Cups take place every four years and so should T20 World Cups.

[Space Cat]

Originally Posted by LastLaugh_PK No sport in the world gets more exposure than football/soccer still it is a part of the Olympics.. As I said earlier.. any sport in which America does not compete in stands no chance of being included in the olympics.

Nonsense. IOC is far more influenced by Europe than America.

[Jo_Don]

Originally Posted by Space Cat You can and should if its not the pinnacle event of the sport. Why should the Olympics be used as a development tournament?

Why shouldn't it? I doubt many of the popular Olympic codes would be as popular were it not for the Olympics itself.

[Space Cat]

The focus should be to try get cricket into the commonwealth games at this stage.

Then if after 20 years if its proven to be successful(unlikely) the IOC may begin to consider it for inclusion.

Say the next time the Olympics returns to Australia or London could be a target for inclusion.

But even it was included i don't think it would last as the Olympics moves on to countries with no cricket connection.

[Maximas]

Was wondering how much successful cricket was in other global sporting event like Commonwealth & Asian Games. 50 over matches were played in 98 Comm' Games Malaysia won by SA was failed event, due BCCI were more interested in ICC ODI- statused 98 Sahara Cup. And in last 2010 Guangzhou Asian Games, Bangladesh & Pakistan winning gold in men & women event played in twenty20 format were somewhat successful and hopefully to stay in 2014 event same as Commonwealth Games. If these coming events gets enough attraction, I'm sure at 2020 it will be in Olympic event. So, t20 is most likely to be played there.

[Space Cat]

Originally Posted by Jo_Don Why shouldn't it? I doubt many of the popular Olympic codes would be as popular were it not for the Olympics itself.

Its supposed to be the pinnacle of athletic competition.

The Olympic motto is "Faster, Higher, Stronger" not "Lets try get better at kicking balls for the real event in 2 years time"

Unfortunately its being over commercialized and invaded by sports that already have their own showpiece world event.

[munafpatel810]

Originally Posted by Mapleleafs What about West Indies, what happens if they win?? Since West Indies is not a country, but a combination of countries...who get's the gold??

It is not a problem but a solution. All countries that make up WI can field their own teams. This will also increase number of countries playing for T20 gold in Olympics. Then there are countries like UAE , Ireland , Scotland ,Bermuda, Netherlands all who can participate. I am sure atleast 24 teams will be formed and thats good number.It will help the popularity of atleast T20 cricket.

[munafpatel810]

Originally Posted by Markhor You could have the World T20 at the Olympics every four years but the ICC have run the World T20 into the ground - and have totally devalued World Cups. We are going to have 4 World Cups in 3 years by the end of 2012. We've had the 2009 T20 World Cup. The 2010 T20 World Cup - which was only nine months or so after the previous one. The 2011 50 over World Cup, and now we are going to have the 2012 T20 World Cup. 50 over World Cups take place every four years and so should T20 World Cups.

So Pakistan was T20 WChampion only for 9 months

[AdidasBeard]

For cricket to be in the olympics it would have to be in every olympics. The hosts do not get to choose which sports they do or do not want to include. Rio, and maybe Tokyo, Madrid or Istanbul would have to magic up atleast 1 stadium to play atleast 30 games (men and women would have to be included). The cricket calender is already full and there are plenty of tournaments to decide who is the best at the world at what. Outside South Asia I really cant see much enthusiasm for cricket to enter the olympics.

[Jo_Don]

Originally Posted by Space Cat Its supposed to be the pinnacle of athletic competition. The Olympic motto is "Faster, Higher, Stronger" not "Lets try get better at kicking balls for the real event in 2 years time" Unfortunately its being over commercialized and invaded by sports that already have their own showpiece world event.

You're still missing the point. Codes such as swimming would not encourage the level of development that it does if it was not in the Olympics. Also, football and tennis are included, despite having premier tournaments of their own.

As mentioned, the hosts do not get a say in what they want to host. If they want to host the Olympics, then they will need to build facilities that do not already exist. Do you think that basketball is a global sport?

[LastLaugh_PK]

TBH if it were upto me.. I would have no team sports in the Olympics.

[LastLaugh_PK]

Originally Posted by Jo_Don You're still missing the point. Codes such as swimming would not encourage the level of development that it does if it was not in the Olympics. Also, football and tennis are included, despite having premier tournaments of their own.

And most football teams send their youth teams.. Hardly following the "Faster,Higher,Stronger" motto..

[AdidasBeard]

Originally Posted by LastLaugh_PK TBH if it were upto me.. I would have no team sports in the Olympics.

Does that include relays? Hockey? Women's football? Team cycling? Volleyball? Handball? 8 man rowing?

[Space Cat]

Originally Posted by Jo_Don You're still missing the point. Codes such as swimming would not encourage the level of development that it does if it was not in the Olympics. Also, football and tennis are included, despite having premier tournaments of their own.

Because its not a point. Swimming is an ancient worldwide sport it didn't just develop because people seen it on TV. It developed further through the Olympics because the pinnacle of swimming is the Olympics.

Tennis shouldn't be in there ether.

[Executioner]

Originally Posted by munafpatel810 It is not a problem but a solution. All countries that make up WI can field their own teams. This will also increase number of countries playing for T20 gold in Olympics. Then there are countries like UAE , Ireland , Scotland ,Bermuda, Netherlands all who can participate. I am sure atleast 24 teams will be formed and thats good number.It will help the popularity of atleast T20 cricket.

Agreed. I dont think there is an issue with the number of teams. but a good reason why its excluded could be because cricket would need a seperate ground for itself. There could be a track around it but the cricket field can only be used for cricket only..and considering the size of a cricket field, it could be a bit expensive. They couldve introduced cricket this year because england has fields...but most other countries dont have facilities for cricket...and even if they do, the fields probably dont have galleries.

[Space Cat]

Originally Posted by AdidasBeard For cricket to be in the olympics it would have to be in every olympics. The hosts do not get to choose which sports they do or do not want to include. Rio, and maybe Tokyo, Madrid or Istanbul would have to magic up atleast 1 stadium to play atleast 30 games (men and women would have to be included). The cricket calender is already full and there are plenty of tournaments to decide who is the best at the world at what. Outside South Asia I really cant see much enthusiasm for cricket to enter the olympics.

Exactly.

[LegCutter]

I enjoy T20s, but they have no place in the olympics. They require nowhere near the skill other sports in olympics demand.

[Space Cat]

Cricket needs to get itself into the commonwealth games and push it as a premier event with an aim to making it fit with the Olympics. As well as working to develop cricket in other nations.

Throwing it in the Olympics and hoping it will stick just won't work. Baseball bombed that way.

[imranq]

Its a shame that cricket is not an Olympic sport while this is:

[AdidasBeard]

Originally Posted by imranq Its a shame that cricket is not an Olympic sport while this is:

One mile walk is not an olympic event

[cornered paktiger]

No - it shouldn't happen. Only sports where winning gold at the Olympics is the pinnacle should be in the Olympics. For that reason, football and tennis are a turn-off at the Olympics. Plus there is already too much international cricket.


Only T20 would be viable and why have the inferior form of the sport in the Olympics?

A couple of practical reasons why it won't happen:

1. England would resist as it is held in the English summer so would dilute their season every 4 years;
2. The ICC would resist as the event would be under the IOC auspices as would threaten the ICC T20 World Cup as the premier world T20 tournament and they would receive no revenue from it
3. The BCCI likewise would be against it as it would threaten the IPL as the primary T20 tournament.
4. West Indies wouldn't be able to complete as a nation - there are around 8 separate countries from the Caribbean that form the West Indies.

[giri26]

How many teams actually play basketball at the international level? I see that there are 12 teams in the men's competition. Cricket can easily get more than that. If thats the case cricket can easily make it.

[AdidasBeard]

Tonnes and tonnes of teams play basketball at international level. They have to get through qualifying to make the olympics

[Jo_Don]

Originally Posted by AdidasBeard Tonnes and tonnes of teams play basketball at international level. They have to get through qualifying to make the olympics

Same for cricket, if you take a look at the ICC members. But how many of them play professionally?

[Space Cat]

Basketball is far stronger worldwide than cricket. It was a demonstration sport and has been full medal event since 1936. There is probably 30 or 40 teams that could compete in the Olympics without being embarrassed.

America dominate but the depth of teams is far greater than in cricket. America also treat it as the pinnacle of International basketball and send their best players.

[Space Cat]

For example the New Zealand basketball team is ranked only 18th in the world and could not qualify for these Olympics. However they have won international competitions and made the semi finals of the world championships. They finished higher than USA in the 2002 world championships.

ICC T20 ratings don't even go as far as 18.

[AdidasBeard]

There are professional basketball leagues in Europe, North America, Asia. The strongest league, the NBA, has 38 nationalities playing in it.

[Space Cat]

Despite all of that. Its still not really a suitable olympic sport.

But at least they have made an effort. Olympic football is a farce.

[Looney]

If curling can make it , why not cricket ?

[Kwremb]

Originally Posted by Looney If curling can make it , why not cricket ?

Tell me about it lol not to mention those boring horse events

[Space Cat]

Well Curling is only in the Winter Olympics.

[Looney]

Yeah , we can have cricket in summer . Cricket is way more popular than curling and still it is not being included , just boggles my mind why it has not made it to the olympics yet .

[Space Cat]

Originally Posted by Looney Yeah , we can have cricket in summer . Cricket is way more popular than curling and still it is not being included , just boggles my mind why it has not made it to the olympics yet .

Its not a popularity contest. Football being included was a money making ploy but cricket only sells in a couple of countries so it will have to wait with the rest of the sports.