T20 cricket in Olympics is a great idea
Columnist
By Kersi Meher-Homji, 28 Jun 2009 Kersi Meher-Homji is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- 2012 London Olympics, Adam Gilchrist, Cricket, Olympics, Twenty20
The Netherlands cricket team celebrate after defeating England in their Twenty20 World Cup cricket match at Lord's cricket ground in London, Friday, June, 5, 2009. AP Photo/Alastair Grant
Gilchrist’s idea of having Twenty20 cricket in the 2012 London Olympics is brilliant. In fact, soon after winning the bid to hold the 2012 Olympics in 2005, England had indicated that cricket would be included as an event. I am not aware of any progress since then.
Currently there are about twenty countries who have played cricket in World Cup events at Fifty50 or Twenty20 levels.
And with a T20 match taking under three hours to complete, it is a feasible and exciting prospect.
However, it will not be the first time, cricket was played in Olympics.
Did you know that cricket was included in the 1900 Paris Olympics? Four countries – Great Britain, France, the Netherlands and Belgium – showed interest. But the last two dropped out.
So the so-called final between Great Britain and France remains the only cricket match in Olympic history.
The historic match was played at Vincennes, France, on 19 and 20 August 1900. But both were glorified club teams.
Britain included players from Devon County Wanderers Club. And France fielded mostly ex-pat Englishmen living in France. They were members of the French Athletic Club.
For reasons difficult to understand even after over 100 years, Britain did not include Test cricketers CB Fry, Ranjitsinhji, AC MacLaren, Sydney Barnes, Colin Blythe, Wilfred Rhodes among others. The legendary WG Grace had retired a year ago aged 51.
Despite the absence of these stars, Great Britain was too good for the hosts, winning easily.
In fact, the British club cricketers gave the French a lesson on how to play le cricket. Here are the scores in brief:
Great Britain 117 and 5 declared for 145 (captain CBK Beachcroft 54, A. Bowerman 59) beat France 78 (FW Christian 7 wickets) and 26 (MH Toller 7 for 9) by 158 runs.
France claimed a silver medal after scoring a measly 104 runs for 20 wickets. Le cricket, indeed!
If cricket is included in the 2012 London Olympics, winning medals will not be that easy.
But will our money-conscious cricketers be game to play with little or no money offered?
Perhaps little has changed in over 100 years!
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Cricket articles
- What we do and don’t know about our Baggy Greens (112)
- Success of Twenty20 spells trouble for ODI cricket (106)
- Channel 9 commentators an annoyance this summer (99)
- Media should call stumps on Rodney Hogg (93)
- One Day Cricket is suffering from Middle Child Syndrome (89)
- Cricket Australia must take a stand against racist spectators (86)
- Dave’s Warner-ful switch-hit panned by precious critics (84)
- Hall of Fame for Indian legend Gavaskar
- Sri Lanka to target ‘weak’ Aussie bowlers
- India backing Rohit Sharma to find form
- Game-by-game preview of round 19
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (4)
- Like father, like son: Alister McDermott on a fast track to the Test team (12)
- Channel Nine unwise to snub sub-continent clash (19)
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (4)
- Pakistan’s win over England a triumph of character (21)
- Steve Waugh is right about cricket’s succession plan (5)
- India vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (180)
- Let’s talk about selection, Test fans (28)
- Pakistan win shows what’s beautiful about the game (12)
- Stats say Kallis is greatest of his generation (27)
- Explore:
- 2012 London Olympics, Adam Gilchrist, Cricket, Olympics, Twenty20
Rabbitz said | June 28th 2009 @ 8:34am | Report comment
No, No, No, No.
While both the Olympics and T20 are both circuses, combining them is a dumb idea.
High profile professional sports, tennis, soccer, basketball, rugby, baseball, swimming, cricket etc should be completely barred from the olympics as I believe they detract from the event as they prevent smaller, less visible sports getting coverage.
Any day of the year I can find television coverage of the professional sports, however once every four years I like to be able to watch a bunch of sports that are otherwise never covered. The increasing inclusion of these professional sports has killed this opportunity.
This has also led to a situation where a few high profile sports get the majority of the available funding and the minor sports get SFA. As an example, one team I was involved with was representing Oz, at a sanctioned Olympic MQS qualification event, the competitors had to pay their own way AND were REQUIRED to pay for their tracksuits. Yet we see swimmers being given multiple “go faster suits” and being fully funded.
So I believed that cricket in all forms should be told by the IOC to take a long jump, so we can watch the long jump (sorry but I couldn’t resist).
Rabz
MVDave said | June 28th 2009 @ 8:51am | Report comment
Cricket is a Commonwealth (Games) sport and thats where it should stay.
Michael C said | June 28th 2009 @ 9:28am | Report comment
For those pushing for Rugby 7s, we may as well have T20 cricket……an abridgement of a real game?!?!?!
Le’ts change Olympic Soccer to ‘penalty 5s’!!!
Although, there’s probably a better and deeper history of womens participation (compared to Rugby) to support the endeavours.
Kersi Meher-Homji said | June 28th 2009 @ 11:48am | Report comment
I agree, Rabbitz, that T20 cricket is a bit of a circus. But Olympics a circus? Never!
If professional sports like soccer, rugby, baseball are contested in Olympics, why not an abridged form of cricket? OK, don’t pay the cricketers for playing in Olympics which will make it an amateur sport for that period. But I don’t think, they will agree! Let us find out.
I understand (and partly agree) with your arguments to exclude team games from Olympics. But to remove swimming? OH NO! It is an integral part of Olympics like running, pole vaulting and yes, long jumping! And yes, swimmers, like rest of the participants, should not be funded for participating in Olympics.
Have I taken a leave of my senses or gone for a nose dive?
onside said | June 28th 2009 @ 11:56am | Report comment
Where will it end.There’s pegnosed underwater ballerinas,coiffured tarted up little girl gymnasts
fiddling with ribbons ,hoops, balls and other prechool paraphernalia and now ,the suggestion of
T/20 cricket.What about a challenge everybody can relate to,a real skill ; shopping trolley pushing.
Dave said | June 28th 2009 @ 12:49pm | Report comment
The Olympics are a circus and in a perfect world you’d want cricket as far away from it as possible because cricket is a lot more cooler than the Olympics.
However, it would help the expansion of the sport in China and the USA and because cricket is one of the most popular games in the world the Olympics just looks nerdish without it.
Kersi Meher-Homji said | June 28th 2009 @ 2:50pm | Report comment
Why is everyone so cynical about Olympics today? I have my reservations about T20 cricket and some “sports” included in the Olympics.
But on the whole Olympics and Paralympics bring people from all walks of life together. Most countries participate — no racial, colour, sex or disability bar. Nothing is perfect but Olympics get as close to it as anything else.
Sport selection needs a rethink. But to condemn and redicule Olympics in toto is not fair.
Dave said | June 28th 2009 @ 2:58pm | Report comment
The problem with the Olympics no one really follows the sports that are in it.
As you get older you care less and less. It’s good for young kids thought teaches them about the world.
Cricket would be good for the Olympics because people care about cricket.
mattamkII said | June 28th 2009 @ 3:08pm | Report comment
Agree Dave. Rugby 7′s did a lot for the Commonwealth Games in Melbs.
MVDave said | June 28th 2009 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
Cricket 20/20and Rugby 7s in the Olympics?? How about Baseball with only 2 innings, Futsal, 9 a side AFL, 7 a side RL, one on one Basketball, 3 a side Ice Hockey etc etc. Give me a break. If the real version aint good enough for the Olympics then forget it. Shortened versions of Rugby and Cricket are for the Commonwealth Games.