One Day International cricket = history?

Originally posted by Crowley
Also, arguing on the InterWeb is FUN!

Don't you get tired of having the same arguments over and over again, though?

Maybe it's just me.

Originally posted by mtthw
Don't you get tired of having the same arguments over and over again, though?

Maybe it's just me.

Not when I can show up Red Night, no.

I just can't abide idiots.

Originally posted by mtthw
Don't you get tired of having the same arguments over and over again, though?

Maybe it's just me.

I'm tired of this one too.

I come in to read a cricket thread and end up with some yahoo making a crack about baseball and throwing around some ridiculous numbers about the popularity of cricket.

From now on, I promise to do my best to ignore the morons and respond only to statements from legitimate posters like yourself and moneyman.

Originally posted by Red Night
I'm tired of this one too.

I come in to read a cricket thread and end up with some yahoo making a crack about baseball and throwing around some ridiculous numbers about the popularity of cricket.

From now on, I promise to do my best to ignore the morons and respond only to statements from legitimate posters like yourself and moneyman.

To be honest, your contribution to this cricket thread has mainly been to denigrate it. Do you actually like/watch/play the game?

Anyway, for my money both baseball, cricket and sevens rugby have far greater claim to be played as an Olympic sport than many others that are - notably rhythmic gymnastics (throwing and catching ribbons in pretty ways), synchronised swimming, synchronised diving and handball.

The question to ask is, do these sports want to become Olympic sports given the plethora of championships that already take place?

Originally posted by Red Night
I'm tired of this one too.

I come in to read a cricket thread and end up with some yahoo making a crack about baseball and throwing around some ridiculous numbers about the popularity of cricket.

From now on, I promise to do my best to ignore the morons and respond only to statements from legitimate posters like yourself and moneyman.

The numbers are fact, I'm afraid. Take 5 minutes and check them yourself, if you want, they are easily verifiable.

BTW, You are the one always throwing around that Donald Bradman quote, looking to start a fight about cricket and now when you get one, you run away, calling me a moron and you won't reply to my posts.
Come now Red, I knew you were a hypocrite, but I didn't think bursting your comfy bubble would almost chase you away.
Better ask Russ to change your name to Yella Night.

Originally posted by buffalobill

The question to ask is, do these sports want to become Olympic sports given the plethora of championships that already take place?

I think so. As soon as the Olympic committee dropped baseball from its list of events, the baseball playing countries came together and organized the World Baseball Classic. I also know that FIDE has petitioned for chess to be included in the Olympics. I think in general, athletes want their respective sport to be played at the Olympic level.

Now bout gymnastics, swimming, and diving; you have to know that even though you may not be interested in these sports, the Olympics is the only competition where these athletes get to compete at an international level.

Originally posted by Crowley
The numbers are fact, I'm afraid. Take 5 minutes and check them yourself, if you want, they are easily verifiable.

BTW, You are the one always throwing around that Donald Bradman quote, looking to start a fight about cricket and now when you get one, you run away, calling me a moron and you won't reply to my posts.
Come now Red, I knew you were a hypoc mfy bubble would almost chase you away.
Better ask Russ to change your name to Yella Night.

Your reasoning is flawed, just because a country has 200 million people doesn't mean all of those 200 million people watch a certain sport. Hence, your argument is pointless.

Originally posted by MoneyManMike
Your reasoning is flawed, just because a country has 200 million people doesn't mean all of those 200 million people watch a certain sport. Hence, your argument is pointless.

Obviously not every single person in every country I listed watches or plays cricket, but a very large portion of the population does.
Especially in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.
Unlike other countries where the sports are watched mainly by men, the women in these countries also actively watch the sport. So I'd say in the countries listed above, more than 50% (minimum) of the actual population plays or watches cricket.
What numbers of the US population does the same for baseball? Definitely not half the population.

My numbers may not be perfectly accurate, because there is no way to get exact numbers, but the argument stands - it is not flawed.

Originally posted by MoneyManMike
Now bout gymnastics, swimming, and diving; you have to know that even though you may not be interested in these sports, the Olympics is the only competition where these athletes get to compete at an international level.

Not so, there are world championship events taking place all the time in these disciplines.

Originally posted by ElleEffSeee
The contrast between the exciting Twenty20 tournament and the dull-as-ditch-water ODI world cup earlier in the year couldn't be more striking. ODIs were invented to get the crowds in. With Twenty20 being more reliable for excitement, will ODIs soon be history? I don't think there's enough room in the calendar for all 3 forms of cricket.

I think that Twenty20 will become more common, but I think there is room for all three formats.

Furtherore, the classic one day game is less likely to be dominated by one individual. It is more evenly balanced between batting and bowling.

Originally posted by Crowley
Not when I can show up Red Night, no.

I just can't abide idiots.

Evidence of the ol' glassies! Nothing up our sleeves, no magic little Alex! A job for two who are now of job age! The police!

Originally posted by MoneyManMike
I think so. As soon as the Olympic committee dropped baseball from its list of events, the baseball playing countries came together and organized the World Baseball Classic. I also know that FIDE has petitioned for chess to be included in the Olympics. I think in general, athletes want their respective sport to be played at the Olympic level..

Mainly because of the profile. In most sports the Olympics is higher profile than any other competition.

Actually, this would be part of my criteria for inclusion in the Olympics - the Olympics should be the pinnacle of the sport. Which would drop some of the 'big' sports. Any footballer would rather win the World Cup than Olympic gold. Tennis players would rather win a grand slam tournament.

This won't happen, though, precisely because these are the big sports. The IOC loves the money they bring in.

Originally posted by mtthw
Mainly because of the profile. In most sports the Olympics is higher profile than any other competition.

Actually, this would be part of my criteria for inclusion in the Olympics - the Olympics should be the pinnacle of the sport. Which would drop some of the 'big' sports. Any footballer would rather win the World Cup than Olympic gold. Tennis players w ...[text shortened]... , though, precisely because these are the big sports. The IOC loves the money they bring in.

This is a complete digression and maybe one should start a new thread, but a notable omission is that of squash, perhaps the one sport that requires the highest level of fitness of all.

Strange. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_sports