Cricket match prediction discussions

[MinMan]

In the past there were more discussion that cricket is time consuming for which Western nations were not into it. Slowly this has changed as the popularity of cricket keeps increasing around the world. As said, few countries are dominant in this and more countries participation will make cricket to be big as soccer. When we talk of Olympics, there is nothing to complicate. When it is asked to the Olympic committee it is said that no application has been received so for to add cricket. We don't know what is the truth.

With this all we can understand what is going on ICC is not interested and because here few countries can lose their worth with this all, so they are not interested in any positive thing for cricket.

Because few months back I read somewhere ICC announced they already send their application, and we are going to Olympics after 10 to 15 years but with this statement all is clear that these corrupt shits are not giving any priority for having good and respective things for cricket and playing their own dirty games for benefiting their Gulf region sponsors. I am going with IOC as they are right they have no application from ICC because these are liars and crap peoples those are working around ICC.

[coinism]

Well.. that is the truth. The IOC reported that they haven't received any application from the ICC, to make cricket as one of the disciplines in Olympic Games. The ICC on the other hand has been trying to fool the fans, by claiming otherwise. Recent opinion polls found overwhelming support from the fans regarding Olympic inclusion. But the businessmen who are in power at the ICC remain opposed to it, for obvious reasons. Now I don't think that IOC will give any special treatment to ICC, when they don't need to do the same with other sports bodies such as the FIFA, FIBA and the FIH.

If this is true then its very bad act by ICC. I searched and wasn't able to find any authentic source where IOC says that they haven't received any request from ICC. On ICC official websiteI found this:

The International Cricket Council has today confirmed its intention to bid for cricket’s inclusion in the Olympic Games. The ICC has convened a Working Group to lead the bid on behalf of the sport which will be focused on cricket becoming part of the Olympic family for LA 2028, Brisbane 2032 and beyond.

If its true then why ICC is doing so? One main reason can be that Big-3 doesn't want more countries to participate in cricket so that they remain sole king.

[S A KHAIR]

it really hurts to see cricket not having any Long Term plan. because as cricket fans we all expect that cricket is going to be played even after we are dead and will be played by many future generations but ICC does not think about the game like that. they are just thinking,’ do I have enough money? yes, I do so cricket is good.

Recently with the introduction of T20 things are change very quickly hopefully in near future we will have some good news with many countries are trying to adopt this new format and bringing their intention in this game but sadly for entry of cricket in Olympics and Asian games we have to wait as this happen surely this will bring some big change and many new countries also join this game as they will be able to have some good funds from IOC and other relative spots authorities.

But, this can hurt our few associates with Olympics has their own system, and they mostly love countries have their own native players instead of having adopted countries which is also good for the game but not for these countries those are bringing players from Sub-Continent for better results instead of having their own domestic set up.

I believe T20 is going to give the new world countries a chance to get recognized with cricket because the other two formats require a lot more skill than T20 cricket. it would be really great to see at least 20  teams participating in the cricket World Cup. And I hope the number is going to increase gradually.

In the past there were more discussion that cricket is time consuming for which Western nations were not into it. Slowly this has changed as the popularity of cricket keeps increasing around the world. As said, few countries are dominant in this and more countries participation will make cricket to be big as soccer. When we talk of Olympics, there is nothing to complicate. When it is asked to the Olympic committee it is said that no application has been received so for to add cricket. We don't know what is the truth.

ICC is really not interested to make cricket a bigger spot around the world but I think the T20 cricket is really going to attract more and more countries towards cricket because it is obviously not that time-consuming. so I believe cricket can have a global acceptance through T20 cricket.

[rugrats]

In the past there were more discussion that cricket is time consuming for which Western nations were not into it. Slowly this has changed as the popularity of cricket keeps increasing around the world. As said, few countries are dominant in this and more countries participation will make cricket to be big as soccer. When we talk of Olympics, there is nothing to complicate. When it is asked to the Olympic committee it is said that no application has been received so for to add cricket. We don't know what is the truth.

With this all we can understand what is going on ICC is not interested and because here few countries can lose their worth with this all, so they are not interested in any positive thing for cricket.

Because few months back I read somewhere ICC announced they already send their application, and we are going to Olympics after 10 to 15 years but with this statement all is clear that these corrupt shits are not giving any priority for having good and respective things for cricket and playing their own dirty games for benefiting their Gulf region sponsors. I am going with IOC as they are right they have no application from ICC because these are liars and crap peoples those are working around ICC.

I really don't think that ICC is actually worried about inserting cricket into the Olympic games because they are very happy with the money that has been generated by cricket and they are very happy by just sitting in the house and counting that money. Right now I really don't have any high hopes about cricket and I know with the current ICC members nothing is going to go well for cricket. this peoples just want money and they are not worried about the greatness of the game at all.

[JSRAW]

Well.. that is the truth. The IOC reported that they haven't received any application from the ICC, to make cricket as one of the disciplines in Olympic Games. The ICC on the other hand has been trying to fool the fans, by claiming otherwise. Recent opinion polls found overwhelming support from the fans regarding Olympic inclusion. But the businessmen who are in power at the ICC remain opposed to it, for obvious reasons. Now I don't think that IOC will give any special treatment to ICC, when they don't need to do the same with other sports bodies such as the FIFA, FIBA and the FIH.

@Sithara007 is it even possible to have test cricket in the Olympics in a hypothetical scenario, because won’t it increase the length of the Olympics too much?.

Furthermore does cricket really needs Olympics? because it’s already popular, and even if it never gets added to the Olympics then too it’ll do just fine in my personal opinion.

Lastly instead of getting cricket into Olympics ICC should focus primarily on making test cricket more interesting via night tests, and use of pink balls as I had suggested previously.

Arey bhai you are taking this conversation on completely different level, may be you missed the previous discussion in the last page

No one actually talking or implying about test format inclusion in the Olympics. Discussion is all about T-20 format > Olympic.

[blatchcorn]

I really don't think that ICC is actually worried about inserting cricket into the Olympic games because they are very happy with the money that has been generated by cricket and they are very happy by just sitting in the house and counting that money. Right now I really don't have any high hopes about cricket and I know with the current ICC members nothing is going to go well for cricket. this peoples just want money and they are not worried about the greatness of the game at all.

But if ICC takes cricket to olympics then it means more countries will join and more money will come to ICC. Its not icc that is against taking cricket to olympics rather its the big powers of cricket behind that move aka big 3. Who will give importance to BCCI when there are 40 to 50 countries playing cricket.

[rugrats]

I really don't think that ICC is actually worried about inserting cricket into the Olympic games because they are very happy with the money that has been generated by cricket and they are very happy by just sitting in the house and counting that money. Right now I really don't have any high hopes about cricket and I know with the current ICC members nothing is going to go well for cricket. this peoples just want money and they are not worried about the greatness of the game at all.

But if ICC takes cricket to olympics then it means more countries will join and more money will come to ICC. Its not icc that is against taking cricket to olympics rather its the big powers of cricket behind that move aka big 3. Who will give importance to BCCI when there are 40 to 50 countries playing cricket.

Yes, I guess that's true because if a lot more countries start playing cricket,  people will eventually give less importance to the bigger teams that have a good amount of authority over the ICC. We can see that in other sports there are a lot of countries taking participation but I have not seen in any of those Sports any kind of domination by the bigger teams like this. I think ICC needs to think with a straight mind and start thinking about making the game a lot more acceptable to the whole world.

[7788bitcoin]

~
ICC is really not interested to make cricket a bigger spot around the world but I think the T20 cricket is really going to attract more and more countries towards cricket because it is obviously not that time-consuming. so I believe cricket can have a global acceptance through T20 cricket.

I responded to these earlier as well. If you are the president of ICC, what you will do to make the sports bigger. How many billions you will be spending to create interest in a country that is not a viable business place for them. The basic thing to create interest is the incentives you get in a sport and how much do you think an associate team member gets annually. Average is $15k annually and the top players might get around $60k and with that kind of financial instability you cannot expect the best athletes from a non playing nation to start playing cricket.

[coinism]

Yes, I guess that's true because if a lot more countries start playing cricket,  people will eventually give less importance to the bigger teams that have a good amount of authority over the ICC. We can see that in other sports there are a lot of countries taking participation but I have not seen in any of those Sports any kind of domination by the bigger teams like this. I think ICC needs to think with a straight mind and start thinking about making the game a lot more acceptable to the whole world.

ICC cant think on its own as it is managed and controlled by Big 3. India who is king in cricket world, have you seen influence of India in any other game? If countries like USA, China, Russia or other such big powers join the cricket then who will listen to these big 3? As long as ICC is in the hands of big 3 forget about Olympics or more countries inclusion in cricket eco-system.   

[rugrats]

Yes, I guess that's true because if a lot more countries start playing cricket,  people will eventually give less importance to the bigger teams that have a good amount of authority over the ICC. We can see that in other sports there are a lot of countries taking participation but I have not seen in any of those Sports any kind of domination by the bigger teams like this. I think ICC needs to think with a straight mind and start thinking about making the game a lot more acceptable to the whole world.

ICC cant think on its own as it is managed and controlled by Big 3. India who is king in cricket world, have you seen influence of India in any other game? If countries like USA, China, Russia or other such big powers join the cricket then who will listen to these big 3? As long as ICC is in the hands of big 3 forget about Olympics or more countries inclusion in cricket eco-system.   

There is no type of influence like this in any other sports by the better performing or any teams with better money in the sports body.

Yes there can be certain cases made like in football there are some Russian persons in very important positions in football and that's why the 2018 World Cup was held in Russia,  but other than that the problem is not that major like cricket,  where it seems like the sports body is almost controlled by a certain group of cricket boards.

[S A KHAIR]

~
ICC is really not interested to make cricket a bigger spot around the world but I think the T20 cricket is really going to attract more and more countries towards cricket because it is obviously not that time-consuming. so I believe cricket can have a global acceptance through T20 cricket.

I responded to these earlier as well. If you are the president of ICC, what you will do to make the sports bigger. How many billions you will be spending to create interest in a country that is not a viable business place for them. The basic thing to create interest is the incentives you get in a sport and how much do you think an associate team member gets annually. Average is $15k annually and the top players might get around $60k and with that kind of financial instability you cannot expect the best athletes from a non playing nation to start playing cricket.

Yes, that is true and that's why more time and resources need to be spent the on the smaller Nations who are showing even a little interest in cricket and even though they are not in a good position in cricket right now,  those countries which certainly has the potential should be helped by the ICC. otherwise, they are obviously not going to be interested to take cricket as their occupation when the pay is so little.

[blatchcorn]

There is no type of influence like this in any other sports by the better performing or any teams with better money in the sports body.

Yes there can be certain cases made like in football there are some Russian persons in very important positions in football and that's why the 2018 World Cup was held in Russia,  but other than that the problem is not that major like cricket,  where it seems like the sports body is almost controlled by a certain group of cricket boards.

Giving host rights of WC to Russia is fine as long as they fulfill requirements of the football WC. Cricket is totally a different thing, here only 3 countries have full control. Before 2000, icc was very much neutral but after 2010 it went totally in control of big3. I don't think this is good for cricket in the long run.

[Sithara007]

@Sithara007 is it even possible to have test cricket in the Olympics in a hypothetical scenario, because won’t it increase the length of the Olympics too much?.

Furthermore does cricket really needs Olympics? because it’s already popular, and even if it never gets added to the Olympics then too it’ll do just fine in my personal opinion.

Lastly instead of getting cricket into Olympics ICC should focus primarily on making test cricket more interesting via night tests, and use of pink balls as I had suggested previously.

OK.. let me answer it point by point

1. We are talking about the inclusion of T20 cricket in Olympics (not test or ODI). Thanks to JSRAW, for already clarifying this. There are suggestions that T10 should be the format for Olympics, but I don't agree. T10 is more like baseball and hardly has anything to do with cricket.

2. Yes. Cricket needs Olympics. That would make sure that associate nations receive funds from their respective governments. If the ICC doesn't want this, then they should increase the associate funding by 50x or 100x. And a popular sport is not something that is restricted to 4-5 countries.

3. Test cricket is dead, whether you want to admit it or not. Soon ODI will be dead as well. Night test will give it a temporary boost, but in the end you can't beat a dead horse hoping that it will wake up.

[blatchcorn]

2. Yes. Cricket needs Olympics. That would make sure that associate nations receive funds from their respective governments. If the ICC doesn't want this, then they should increase the associate funding by 50x or 100x. And a popular sport is not something that is restricted to 4-5 countries.

There are many countries who don't take cricket seriously otherwise but there are fair chances that if cricket goes to Olympics then many countries will start taking cricket seriously. Also going to Olympics means more people will get to know about this sports and that will inturn increase number of countries participating in cricket. Real thing is, when we will see cricket in Olympics.

[Minecache]

@Sithara007 is it even possible to have test cricket in the Olympics in a hypothetical scenario, because won’t it increase the length of the Olympics too much?.

Furthermore does cricket really needs Olympics? because it’s already popular, and even if it never gets added to the Olympics then too it’ll do just fine in my personal opinion.

Lastly instead of getting cricket into Olympics ICC should focus primarily on making test cricket more interesting via night tests, and use of pink balls as I had suggested previously.

OK.. let me answer it point by point

1. We are talking about the inclusion of T20 cricket in Olympics (not test or ODI). Thanks to JSRAW, for already clarifying this. There are suggestions that T10 should be the format for Olympics, but I don't agree. T10 is more like baseball and hardly has anything to do with cricket.

2. Yes. Cricket needs Olympics. That would make sure that associate nations receive funds from their respective governments. If the ICC doesn't want this, then they should increase the associate funding by 50x or 100x. And a popular sport is not something that is restricted to 4-5 countries.

3. Test cricket is dead, whether you want to admit it or not. Soon ODI will be dead as well. Night test will give it a temporary boost, but in the end you can't beat a dead horse hoping that it will wake up.

Yes, I agree with most of the points here. T10 really looks like something that should be done way into the future. Cricket is not in a good position right now even though a lot of people are going to say otherwise. I believe the addition of T20 cricket in the Olympics is surely going to be a great step taken for the best.

The only thing that I don't agree entirely with is that ODI is going to be dead soon. I believe ODI still has a lot of time to its popularity but it is true that as T20 is becoming more popular the longer formats of cricket will surely become a lot less popular around the whole world. If ICC wants to actually improve the situation of cricket it needs to concentrate on gaining popularity with the T20 format.

[blatchcorn]

Yes, I agree with most of the points here. T10 really looks like something that should be done way into the future. Cricket is not in a good position right now even though a lot of people are going to say otherwise. I believe the addition of T20 cricket in the Olympics is surely going to be a great step taken for the best.

The only thing that I don't agree entirely with is that ODI is going to be dead soon. I believe ODI still has a lot of time to its popularity but it is true that as T20 is becoming more popular the longer formats of cricket will surely become a lot less popular around the whole world. If ICC wants to actually improve the situation of cricket it needs to concentrate on gaining popularity with the T20 format.

I think T20 is good enough, reducing T20 further down to T10 wont make game interesting rather make it unappealing. We have seen T10 league in Dubai and I dont like it. Cricket remain unpopular just because for decades we only have Test and ODI but now with introduction of T20 format more countries are taking interest in cricket.

[JSRAW]

@Sithara007 is it even possible to have test cricket in the Olympics in a hypothetical scenario, because won’t it increase the length of the Olympics too much?.

Furthermore does cricket really needs Olympics? because it’s already popular, and even if it never gets added to the Olympics then too it’ll do just fine in my personal opinion.

Lastly instead of getting cricket into Olympics ICC should focus primarily on making test cricket more interesting via night tests, and use of pink balls as I had suggested previously.

OK.. let me answer it point by point

1. We are talking about the inclusion of T20 cricket in Olympics (not test or ODI). Thanks to JSRAW, for already clarifying this. There are suggestions that T10 should be the format for Olympics, but I don't agree. T10 is more like baseball and hardly has anything to do with cricket.

2. Yes. Cricket needs Olympics. That would make sure that associate nations receive funds from their respective governments. If the ICC doesn't want this, then they should increase the associate funding by 50x or 100x. And a popular sport is not something that is restricted to 4-5 countries.

3. Test cricket is dead, whether you want to admit it or not. Soon ODI will be dead as well. Night test will give it a temporary boost, but in the end you can't beat a dead horse hoping that it will wake up.

In all this debate IOC and ICC also need to find some common ground.

I stopped following their discussion but back then one main roadblock was that IOC wanted or putting pressure on ICC about sending senior national teams and BCCI along with others (BIG-3 + ICC) were against it due to bilateral series and ofc some assumption that what would happen if ICC tournaments are clashing with the Olympics.

Not sure if it's resolved or not.

[blatchcorn]

In all this debate IOC and ICC also need to find some common ground.

I stopped following their discussion but back then one main roadblock was that IOC wanted or putting pressure on ICC about sending senior national teams and BCCI along with others (BIG-3 + ICC) were against it due to bilateral series and ofc some assumption that what would happen if ICC tournaments are clashing with the Olympics.

Not sure if it's resolved or not.

ICC and BCCI have no objection in stopping the International cricket for two months for IPL (one match per day). Its very much clear that Big 3 dont want Cricket to be in olympics or adding more cricket since that will challenge the supremacy of big3 in cricket. I dont think crikcet is going to Olympics as long as its controlled by big3.

[hichamito37]

Giving host rights of WC to Russia is fine as long as they fulfill requirements of the football WC. Cricket is totally a different thing, here only 3 countries have full control. Before 2000, icc was very much neutral but after 2010 it went totally in control of big3. I don't think this is good for cricket in the long run.

This is obviously not good for cricket in the long run and the big 3 know very well that if there are a lot more countries playing cricket it is possible that they will lose the power that they have over the ICC and I think that's why they are the ones who probably pressurize ICC do not have more teams play cricket regularly.

[JSRAW]

In all this debate IOC and ICC also need to find some common ground.

I stopped following their discussion but back then one main roadblock was that IOC wanted or putting pressure on ICC about sending senior national teams and BCCI along with others (BIG-3 + ICC) were against it due to bilateral series and ofc some assumption that what would happen if ICC tournaments are clashing with the Olympics.

Not sure if it's resolved or not.

ICC and BCCI have no objection in stopping the International cricket for two months for IPL (one match per day). Its very much clear that Big 3 dont want Cricket to be in olympics or adding more cricket since that will challenge the supremacy of big3 in cricket. I dont think crikcet is going to Olympics as long as its controlled by big3.

I highly doubt that. In my understanding BCCI had a big problem due to this ruling that's why they were blocking the Olympic bidding. Indian players are cash cow for the BCCI and unfortunately they do think that they literally own them.

Giving host rights of WC to Russia is fine as long as they fulfill requirements of the football WC. Cricket is totally a different thing, here only 3 countries have full control. Before 2000, icc was very much neutral but after 2010 it went totally in control of big3. I don't think this is good for cricket in the long run.

Small correction... Before 2005-07 ICC was controlled by ECB and CA completely, they were never neutral.