I presume you have to have a certain number of countries playing a sport to include it...otherwise I'd go for T20 cricket.
Haven't seen it this tme, but didn't they used to let you bring on specialist corner takers for short corners.
Two words, synchronised swimming. Cricket is the 2nd most played sport in the world,2nd most watched as well. There most be about 15-20 countries that culd compete in the olympics.
Is it really? Was about to say that only a few would have a chance of winning it, but that is also true of other sports. The trouble is we might have to let baseball in then.
Firstly, i'm one of those who says the olympics should either be the pinnacle for a sport or open only to amateurs. Neither of these are true for Rugby or golf. Secondly, including Rugby and Golf is continuing along terribly anglo-centric lines, and I doubt their worldwide appeal (how many people are going to turn up to watch Olympic Rugby in Rio). Why can we not get non-British other sports in, for instance Kabaddi, which is hugely popular in Asia? Darts, cricket and snooker should not be in the Olympics, because they all lack true worldwide appeal (although at least snooker seems to be making slow progress towards becoming an international sport).
Softball was in the Olympics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Softball_at_the_Summer_Olympics#2008_Summer_Olympics and hardly any countries play that. You could get about 16 countries to participate in the cricket I think http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_International_Cricket_Council_members.
I don't think the ICC would really want cricket in the olympics. The international schedule is a nightmare as it is. Plus you might be able to get enough teams to have a competition, but who's gonna turn up to watch?
From a partisan point of view, this has been the first boring day at the Olympics. Have been searching for something to watch and have just noticed that we don't have any contenders in the decathlon. Oh for the glory days of Daley Thompson.
Cricket is the 2nd most popular sport in the world,I don't think it lacks worldwide appeal. So you think that synchronised swimming,table tennis,shooting,bmx cycling have more worldwide appeal than Darts,Cricket and Snooker?
You sure? I think Formula One must be put above cricket, especially in terms of viewing figures and attendances. Why not have motor-racing?
http://top-10-list.org/2010/10/04/10-most-watched-world-sports/ Yeah,it would be good if there was Motor-racing in the olympics.
My understanding is that is pretty much the main reason why, despite much talk and interest (including, I believe, from the IOC themselves), nothing happened with regards to getting t20 cricket into the 2016 Olympics. The ICC just do not want to have to cut something from their (already too packed) calendar, particularly so that they do not forgo all that sponsorship and television money etc. (Although they do claim that the 2013 Champions Trophy, a truly pointless competition which exists solely to line the pockedts of the ICC, will be the last edition of that competition). I would personally love t20 cricket in the Olympics, and think it would help the sport (or at least that version of the sport) to grow across the globe. Even at present, there are still easily enough countries to take part in it.
Cricket does lack worldwide appeal. Nobody in the Americas cares about it, nobody in europe cares about it, 98% of Africa doesn't care about it, 75% of asia doesn't care about it. One very populous country being absolutely fanatical about a sport doesn't give it worldwide appeal. Also, if you include sports based on peak viewing figures, you would include both American Football and Baseball. And yes, I would say synchronised swimming, table tennis, shooting and BMX have more global appeal than darts, cricket and snooker. For instance, only 2 players from outside the UK and Ireland have ever won the 'world' snooker championship.
