Does China have hope in Cricket?

[Turbinator]

Where are they going to get good fast bowlers from? China aren't exactly known for having a tall population (Yao Ming excepted)

FYI northern China is filled with tall people.

 

[Slats4ever]

yao ming was created by the government. The government wanted to have a person like yao ming so badly that they found 2 of the tallest people in china and mated them, thus creating yao ming (true story)

with things like this going on i'm sure they'll be able to make a good cricket side with enough tall people.

 

[silentstriker]

yao ming was created by the government. The government wanted to have a person like yao ming so badly that they found 2 of the tallest people in china and mated them, thus creating yao ming (true story)

No, it isn't. If they were forced to wed and have children, surely they would have been forced to have more than one. Yao Ming is an only child.

 

[andyc]

Much has been said about some form of selective breeding by the government, IIRC. Whether it's true or not is a different story.

Anyway, the original comment about no tall players is completely unfounded. While the average Chinese man would most likely be slightly shorter than the average Western man, it's not as if they're all four feet tall.

 

[Turbinator]

No, it isn't. If they were forced to wed and have children, surely they would have been forced to have more than one. Yao Ming is an only child.

You're forgetting China's one child rule.......

 

[andyc]

You're forgetting China's one child rule.......

Which isn't watertight. Those in urban areas can have more than one, while if you have a girl first, you can wait a few years and have another crack at getting your son.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Which isn't watertight. Those in urban areas can have more than one, while if you have a girl first, you can wait a few years and have another crack at getting your son.

+ a healthy bribe of local government officials probably helps out too.

 

[Slats4ever]

No, it isn't. If they were forced to wed and have children, surely they would have been forced to have more than one. Yao Ming is an only child.

yes he is. i'm sorry i've read documentaries on it over there. a lot of what you have read has been censored by the chinese government. sorry

 

[Fratboy]

Common sense dictates that if you're going to forcibely mate two individuals in hope of producing an extraordinary one, you insure yourself against chances of failure by making them mate multpile times for multiple offspring. Its the same principle as in test tube babies. Sorry, you're either gullible or misinformed.

 

[Slats4ever]

ok we'll agree to disagree and i'll rely on my valuable sources from being over there and doing a bit've research on it!! anything that comes out've china is very hard to believe. who's to know he's an only child...

 

[Dasa]

ok we'll agree to disagree and i'll rely on my valuable sources from being over there and doing a bit've research on it!! anything that comes out've china is very hard to believe. who's to know he's an only child...

I'm assuming your sources would relate this book or something similar. If so, that's far from a confirmed version of the facts and is highly disputed.

I'm sure there may be some truth in that story, but it's more likely that it has been embellished and exaggerated...certainly reading reviews of that particular source, opinion is divided as to the accuracy of the claims outlined in the book.

It's also worth noting that none of the claims about 'forced breeding' in order to create a basketballer such as Yao Ming have been verified.

 

[Jono]

Lol, sorry if I see the humour in this, but if China did breed two tall people to create an uber tall Chinese man to play basketball, that is one of the coolest things ever (ignoring any morality issues obviously).

 

[silentstriker]

Lol, sorry if I see the humour in this, but if China did breed two tall people to create an uber tall Chinese man to play basketball, that is one of the coolest things ever (ignoring any morality issues obviously).

Can we mate the children of Ambrose and Lara and kidnap them to India to produce the ultimate all rounder?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

The reason Zimbabwe lost Test status was not because of human rights or any other such "internal affairs". They lost Test status because they were horrible, due to most of their quality players being unwilling to play for them.

Hmmm... now let's think a bit about WHY those players refused to play for them...

1 and 1 is 2
2 and 1 is 3

 

[shortpitched713]

Hmmm... now let's think a bit about WHY those players refused to play for them...

1 and 1 is 2
2 and 1 is 3

Yes, but what I'm trying to say is that if those players had played anyway, they would have maintained their Test status even if the human rights issues were more severe than they actually were.

The fact of the matter is that I see it highly unlikely that China's human rights record is going to effect them having the best possible team out on the field at all times.

 

[Goughy]

Hmmm... now let's think a bit about WHY those players refused to play for them...

1 and 1 is 2
2 and 1 is 3

And it all adds upto economic reasons at the end of the day. Human Rights and the govt certainly contribute to a bad economy but if the players had been paid on a par with other Test cricketers and treated well they would still be playing.

Never underestimate or devalue the desire for players to look after their own and their family's financial well being.

 

[Craig]

Their main goal is to beat India in a test match. They certainly have a chance by say 2030. They tend to excel at a sport if they really put their mind to it. But we'll see. In the end, it has to become popular, instead of just being forced, in order for it to really work.

I'd love to see a test match in Shanghai. I think it'd be great for cricket.

So I guess that would be a pretty big thing politically then?

 

[Craig]

Forget Test status, they'll be winning the 2019 world cup!

It's very possible to win a world cup without being a test calibre nation. Look at how far Kenya got recently . They were two games away from winning the WC, yet they are nowhere near Test calibre. They would need a lot of luck and some good streaking combined with a collective slump in a couple other nations...but thats a lot more likely than being a winner in the test arena. Or they could just repeatedly play England to gain confidence .

But if they try playing England in Tests...they wouldn't last two days. Its just too hard to keep it going for five days.

Test Status > ODI wins

True but that was only because New Zealand quite rightly refused to go there.

 

[Dick Rockett]

The reason Zimbabwe lost Test status was not because of human rights or any other such "internal affairs". They lost Test status because they were horrible, due to most of their quality players being unwilling to play for them. I think China would make all of their best players play for them so I don't think they'll have any such similar problem.

The ICC didn't have the balls to ban them for the right reasons. The appalling fall in the standard of Zimbabwe's play simply forced their hand.

While several on here have made the fair point that virtually none of the current test nations have spotless human rights records, it's a bit cheeky to compare that to the sort of shenanigans the Chinese government gets up to these days. Cricket doesn't need to be seen to condone that kind of behaviour - any attempt by the ICC to get China up to test standard is simply a play at milking another cash cow, IMO.

 

[shortpitched713]

Cricket doesn't need to be seen to condone that kind of behaviour.

I don't see what cricket has to do with these sort of things really. Looking at your statement in another way, the ICC doesn't need to be seen to condone any government policy.

The ICC is there to facilitate the international play of countries that are at an international quality level. Now I do think that there are some rare cases where cricket ostracism is justified. South Africa during apartheid was one of them. However, I feel that the ICC should defer to the international political community when it comes to these judgements. Banning South Africa was justified because the international community had placed sanctions on South Africa. It would have created a lot of outrage if the ICC had done anything else.

On the other hand, modern day China is a very much tolerated part of the international community. I don't see too many, if any countries placing sanctions on China, so the ICC needs to defer to international opinion and include China. I think any other policy sets up a dangerous precedent for the ICC in an era where they hope to expand cricket. If they exclude China from international cricket now, what stops them from excluding half the countries in the world for "below average human rights records." The ICC shouldn't exclude countries from international cricket just because some people don't like them.

Although a policy of defering to the international community may not seem like the "moral" thing to do, it is the only logical one. Anything else only hurts cricket without any benefit. The ICC making a lone moral stand against a country isn't going to effect that country's policies as the folks that really matter, other governments, condone their behavior. On the other hand, international cricket misses out on all the talent that that country could have brought to the table.

I feel that we should leave it up to the real international policy makers, governments, to make the moral desicions. After that we need to adapt to the world around us, and not make things too hard for ourself with needless "moral stands."