Does a non-global sport like cricket deserve a world cup?
Go out of subcontinent and you'll hardly find a pub with people cheering their team.
Infact not even global media give it special coverage(even rugby world cup gets special coverage)
Only a dozen or so team and all from commonwealth.
90% of so called world cup is watched by a single nationality.
Despite being a cricket fan myself ,i dont think cricket deserves world cup.theres no USA,japan,china,no European teams(beside britis),no brazil,etc.
I would rather it be named like "world cricket classic", "champions trophy", or "commonwealth cup".
Only football truly deserves a "WORLD CUP",and to a smaller extent rugby wc(truly grown in stature in recent years).
Cricket is ok with its leisurely bilateral tours program,etc.
"world cup" or "commonwealth cup"?
posted on 27/9/12
I see absolutely no problem with it
Essentially the game is played by nations that extend across various parts of the globe from Africa to the Americas. Regardless of the amount of teams that compete or indeed their backgrounds it is a world game what ever way you look at it.
Also think of the marketing aspect and the pull. Calling it the Commonwealth Cup hardly sounds exciting or as attractive to sponsors does it?
Take Snooker for example. It's generally played by Brits and Chinese at the top level. Would you want them after nearly 40 years of the modern Would Snooker Championship's to give it a name change? Seeing as it's not played everywhere. I doubt many would.
posted on 27/9/12
Points taken galloping.
But wouldnt agree cricket is a global game.
For eg in Asia,out of abt 50 countries, only about 8 know cricket(similar to baseball,another minority sport), in south africa its popular in 2 or 3 nation.
In Great Britain, its popular in only england, forget europe.
Not one of the worlds top 5 richest countries (USA,china,japan,russia,germany)etc play cricket. Of the 10 nation where cricket is popular(only 4 mth a year in half of them), half the nation are 3rd world countries.
My point is, unless some of the bigger ,greater nations start playing cricket then cricket on global respect should be considered minor.
In that respect the shining light is india and its possible influence in the world.
ICC has not been effective.
posted on 27/9/12
its very hard to develop cricket in other countries, simply because u can only become gd after playing gd teams like the test playing nations.
Its gd in a way that we hv cricket only in these countries ow, we would be able to enjoy the bilateral series we get to see our team playing after every couple of years.
Cricket is the hardest sport so it would be hard to see it expanding quickly in other countries. just look at india and sl. It has taken them years of experiance to reach where they are now. India in 50s-70s were like minnows.
posted on 27/9/12
Bir,
Its hard for hardworking people to get involved in a game that goes for 5 days. People in non cricket countries are often amazed to know that you can play for 5 days.
For them 4-5 hours is the max they can af ford on the entertainment front.