there are most of the sports in olympics but not the cricket give reasons for putting cricket there and for not putting cricket there expect that an average odi cricket game takes 7 hours and a test games takes 4 days
2006-06-15 06:47:04 · 25 answers · asked by ranjit s 1 in Sports ➔ Cricket
WWE IS ALSO NOT IN OLYMPICS.
THE VERY SAME REASON WHY CRICKET IS NOT INCLUDED IN OLYMPICS.
2006-06-17 20:44:58 · answer #1 · answered by A.R.RAJA 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Many have replied with the suggestion of 20-20. I too say the same. I know it doesn't add anything to the already replied answers. But i didn't want to miss out such an important question.
20-20 is fast and very thrilling. It is a short game too. It sure can be added in the olympics. Just look at the cricket following nations. India (for that matter the entire subcontinent), England, Australia, New zeland, Canada had a few matches hosted, USA will have one series playing India and West Indies. These are big countries. I know one will argue with a bigger list of soccer following nations. But this is not cricket Vs soccer. It is just cricket - yes or no. Given the list of countries involving in cricket recently, it is right time to include cricket in the London olympics.
2006-06-15 16:44:37 · answer #2 · answered by Kishore 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I love cricket!
Going to the Olympics in Sydney and watching baseball was great, I love that sport too. (and just because there is a bat & a ball, does NOT mean they're that similar, but I think that is what most people try to compare it to.)
They are talking about taking baseball out of the Olympics. One day cricket is exciting. (it can be as slow as a slow nine innings of baseball as well) 20-20 is getting quite popular and really fun to watch. That might work.
Plus, I think there are more countries that understand cricket than baseball...ust because it's not an "American" sport. I'm American and we dominate so many sports. Cricket would at least give the Indians, Sri Lankans and West Indies a sport where they could contend in the Games.
Isn't the point of the Olympics to have sports that we may not be so familiar with, but gives us a chance every four years to get excited about and try to understand?!
Yeah, leave baseball and ADD cricket! GO Australia in the Ashes!!! ;-)
2006-06-15 07:50:59 · answer #3 · answered by midori_margarita 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, there's a case for cricket in the Olympics. The best format would be Twenty20, which is a 3 hour version of cricket, designed for TV. With London hosting the 2012 Games, that would be the opportune time to introduce it, as England is the ancestral home of cricket.
Cricket is now played in many parts of the world, including USA, and probably has a bigger following then say, handball or wrestling.
2006-06-15 13:55:39 · answer #4 · answered by RogerW 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Somebody called Rash told that since all countries dont have a team it isnt being played in the olympics. But somebody also said that Baseball ia played in the olympics. I f baseball is played(which most indians wouldnt know exists if not for hollywood) y not cricket????. Cricket is far more more popular than baseball. in fact countries like Bermuda, USA etc are also finally playing if not the big game at least the U-19. GOOOO CRICKET.
P.S- If it ever reaches the olympics im sure india and Australia will compete in the finals
2006-06-18 21:05:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
first of all some 1 above me said that half of the world does not know about it its coz they dont see the sports on the t.v that they does not know about if it goes to olymics it would make many fans for the cricket coz i dont think that there is some 1 who does not watch olympics i think u agree with me and if they see criket in olympics they will start to know something about it and yes it is a pretty long game and needs a big ground to be played i know u will be thinking that football also needs a big ground then why it is in the olympics coz in the football ground while the match is on the the people do races beside it they do there sports dontr they they do that is not possible with cricket hope it come to olympics this time
2006-06-15 07:02:11 · answer #6 · answered by HULK 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
for not putting the cricket in Olympics may be that it take minnimum 7 hours. and all other games takes more less time then cricket.
if ICC trying it will be the part of OLympics.
Cricket should be the part of olympics in featur
2006-06-15 18:31:37 · answer #7 · answered by ather 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes that's the only way that india can win a medal.the reason for cricket not being played in olympics is that it is not played in all the countries.all the countries do not have players and grounds to support the game.
2006-06-16 23:13:43 · answer #8 · answered by rash 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think cricket should be in olympics, because all other major sports are included....if time is a problem....they could have a knock out tournament.... or they can have 20/20
2006-06-15 08:38:31 · answer #9 · answered by patelville 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, because cricket is the most unique of all games. many olympic playing countries have very bad ideas about cricket. so i will be hating india playing with this countries
2006-06-15 08:03:03 · answer #10 · answered by sikandar 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1/3 of world knows cricket...this is the cricket playes one or more then 4 days.if u tell me which game plays 5 days..this is nice game .if U.S plays cricket then it will be a game in olympics.its shame to olympic commity.
2006-06-16 19:45:07 · answer #11 · answered by Andhra Wala 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋