Where is cricket the national game??

[archie mac]

Just to add my few cents into the debate about Australia's favoured winter game, while Aussie Rules has done a better job of expanding than rugby league, Sydney TV ratings for the AFL are embarrassing in comparison to even the lowliest NRL fixture. I think rugby league has some sort of a case when you consider it still totally dominates the public psyche in the nation's biggest city.

No doubt League followed by Rugby are the top sports in NSW, QLD and the ACT, but over all Aussie Rules is No.1. In fact large parts of NSW are Aussie Rules mad.

The Swans rate well in Sydney and the Lions are drawing bigger crowds then the Broncos.

Not that I have anything against any of the codes, most of us here in Canberra follow them all.

 

[Zinzan]

imo "national game" should not be defined by some official status but rather a realistic look at which game most permeates the public consciousness (this does NOT mean looking at player numbers- e.g. in NZ rugby is well down the list in terms of player numbers but is CLEARLY the national game.)

.

agree with that

 

[Deja moo]

I find it interested that Pakistan and India apparently claim hockey as their national game while admitting that cricket is the national obsession and most closely followed sport.

imo "national game" should not be defined by some official status but rather a realistic look at which game most permeates the public consciousness (this does NOT mean looking at player numbers- e.g. in NZ rugby is well down the list in terms of player numbers but is CLEARLY the national game.)
.

That would be tricky, because unlike NZ ( and I'm assuming this), no one sport has been permanently imprinted in the public consciousness. Old foggies like SJS might have a better idea, but my understanding is that Hockey in India ruled the roost right throught the 1900s, and only surrendered its mantle to cricket after the 83 cricket WC win.

 

[Shoaib]

PAKISTAN - I'd think cricket, but apparently Hockey???

Hockey may have the official status as Pakistan's national sport but I dont think that it should be given the status of national sport as not even 10% know its basics and the names of the players of our hockey team .Cricket is definitly our national sport as its the most popular sport here and even our uneducated & unliterated class is familiar with almost all the cricket rules and players even from other countries.

INDIA - someone tried to tell me weightlifting but surely cricket??

Not really.The "official" national sport of India is also but cricket is the most popular sport just like in the case of Pakistan.

For me,the national sport of both countries is cricket.

 

[Slifer]

In most English speaking WI countries we acknowledge cricket as our national sports although other sports such as basket ball and football (soccer) may have a larger following.

 

[steds]

No doubt League followed by Rugby are the top sports in NSW, QLD and the ACT, but over all Aussie Rules is No.1. In fact large parts of NSW are Aussie Rules mad.

The Swans rate well in Sydney and the Lions are drawing bigger crowds then the Broncos.

Tragedy, isn't it?

 

[archie mac]

Tragedy, isn't it?

Yes your right it should be all Aussie Rules

 

[Don]

well im not sure about the other west indian countries but in trinidad its either football(soccer) or cricket.rugby is getting a bit popular.being introduced to the secondary schools.basketball is fairly popular.but really and truly i think football is the champ in trinidad u see it being played everywhere streets,yards,basketball courts,cricket fields,schools,classrooms,inside houses sometimes even on the roof

 

[Salamuddin]

India's national sport (any my favourite ) is most definitely hockey with eight Olympic Gold medals won by the national team.

India still produce very skillful hockey players like Gagan Ajit Singh, Dilip Tirkey but the Indian Hockey Federation makes the BCCI look like an extremely professional and efficiently run body.
STill have hopes that one day we well get some decent administrators/coaches and India will rise to the top of the hockey world again.


Apparently tennis and volleyball are rising quickly in populairty in India as well.

 

[Richard]

I got told by someone that cricket is considered to be the "national game" of England. The person did acknowledge that football is obviously bigger, but said historically.........cricket is considered England's national game....perhaps English fans can clarify this.. Seems kind of strange though because one would naturally think the most popular game is the national sport....but not according to this guy.

It got me thinking about the main cricketing nations and what is their national sport ....and without knowing I'd think.....

AUSTRALIA - Cricket (aussie rules massive in some parts but cricket everywhere, swimmings pretty big to.)

ENGLAND - Cricket/football?? not sure

SOUTH AFRICA - Rugby (tradionally, some may argue soccer)

NEW ZEALAND - Rugby (no doubt)

PAKISTAN - I'd think cricket, but apparently Hockey???

SRI LANKA - Surely crickets no.1

INDIA - someone tried to tell me weightlifting but surely cricket??

WEST INDIES - seperate countries ...but some say Basketball ..again not sure

ZIMBABWE - cricket/soccer??

BANGLADESH - cricket ?? do they play other sports??


Firstly I wonder if countries do always actually acknowledge they have one "national sport", and if so I'd appreciate any comments on the above countries..

Why no Kenya
If you include Zimbabwe and Bangladesh you should include Kenya.
For that matter, you might as well include the lot of the Associate Nations, too.

 

[Richard]

cricket attendances are skyrocketing with the success of the England team and the emergence of Twenty20 cricket.

Not true. England attendances in Tests and ODIs against up-to-standard teams have rarely been poor (with odd exceptions, plus most games at Old Trafford) and Twenty20 has been popular since it's inception.
The attendances at routine Championship matches - utterly inevitably - have not moved, and nor will they ever again in all likelihood (unless England are indeed kicked-out of international cricket), and National League and C&G matches have - sadly - declined in popularity of late, which is a real waste and one of the reasons behind the somewhat regressive move to return National League games to the 40-over format next season.

 

[Richard]

I got told by someone that cricket is considered to be the "national game" of England. The person did acknowledge that football is obviously bigger, but said historically.........cricket is considered England's national game....perhaps English fans can clarify this.. Seems kind of strange though because one would naturally think the most popular game is the national sport....but not according to this guy.

It got me thinking about the main cricketing nations and what is their national sport ....and without knowing I'd think.....

AUSTRALIA - Cricket (aussie rules massive in some parts but cricket everywhere, swimmings pretty big to.)

ENGLAND - Cricket/football?? not sure

SOUTH AFRICA - Rugby (tradionally, some may argue soccer)

NEW ZEALAND - Rugby (no doubt)

PAKISTAN - I'd think cricket, but apparently Hockey???

SRI LANKA - Surely crickets no.1

INDIA - someone tried to tell me weightlifting but surely cricket??

WEST INDIES - seperate countries ...but some say Basketball ..again not sure

ZIMBABWE - cricket/soccer??

BANGLADESH - cricket ?? do they play other sports??


Firstly I wonder if countries do always actually acknowledge they have one "national sport", and if so I'd appreciate any comments on the above countries..

Fact is, England, Australia and New Zealand all have winter and summer games. Only in England is the overlap so absurdly large.

 

[Swervy]

Not true. England attendances in Tests and ODIs against up-to-standard teams have rarely been poor (with odd exceptions, plus most games at Old Trafford) and Twenty20 has been popular since it's inception.
The attendances at routine Championship matches - utterly inevitably - have not moved, and nor will they ever again in all likelihood (unless England are indeed kicked-out of international cricket), and National League and C&G matches have - sadly - declined in popularity of late, which is a real waste and one of the reasons behind the somewhat regressive move to return National League games to the 40-over format next season.

actually I think attendances in the County Champioship have increased a fair amount in the last few years...apparently from 2000 to 2004 attendances rose in theCC by 11% or something

 

[Richard]

They rose slightly from 2002 to 2003, then fell again in 2004, IIRR.
Either way, domestic-First-Class-cricket anywhere in The World will never be a major spectator sport and England is no different.

 

[Swervy]

They rose slightly from 2002 to 2003, then fell again in 2004, IIRR.
Either way, domestic-First-Class-cricket anywhere in The World will never be a major spectator sport and England is no different.

well I agree, whilst much of the first class game is played during the working week, the CC will never attract big crowds.

another part of the problem is now having the centrally contracted players..who really wants to go and see a bunch of mediocre fringe international players (well not all of them anyway) and no mark county trundlers, on a cloudy Thursday afternoon. People want to see the stars play.

Whilst i do think the standard of county cricket has increased recently, the lack of true geniune stars playing at domestic level is a big shame.

The reluctance of counties to move the games around their respective counties to smaller venues is a shame as well. I beleive a study was done on this, and it was shown that attendances in these games (such as Scarborough, or Blackpool for Yorks and Lancs) over the full game exceeds those at the main centres (Leeds and Manchester)

 

[Richard]

In the 1970s and 1980s it would have been perfectly possible to have, say, Somerset against Hampshire with Botham, Richards and Garner against Marshall and Greenidge. Hardly anyone watched, even then.
I don't feel the standard of the domestic game in England has increased at all - that's just people saying that as an automatic reaction to the fact that England have won 6 series in a row. The scoring-rates are still too fast, bat still dominates ball far too much, there is still too much cricket played, too many mediocre professionals on the fringes, too many mediocre Kolpak and EU-Passport players, etc.
There are many problems in English cricket - I feel the best thing that could be done would be to put Matthew Engel in charge of it, with unequivocal final-say, and maybe someone like Michael Atherton below him.
I've heard many, many wild theories on how to make the English game better, but Engel almost always seems to make most sense to me.

 

[Swervy]

In the 1970s and 1980s it would have been perfectly possible to have, say, Somerset against Hampshire with Botham, Richards and Garner against Marshall and Greenidge. Hardly anyone watched, even then.
I don't feel the standard of the domestic game in England has increased at all - that's just people saying that as an automatic reaction to the fact that England have won 6 series in a row. The scoring-rates are still too fast, bat still dominates ball far too much, there is still too much cricket played, too many mediocre professionals on the fringes, too many mediocre Kolpak and EU-Passport players, etc.
There are many problems in English cricket - I feel the best thing that could be done would be to put Matthew Engel in charge of it, with unequivocal final-say, and maybe someone like Michael Atherton below him.
I've heard many, many wild theories on how to make the English game better, but Engel almost always seems to make most sense to me.

you dont feel the standard has increaed because you never saw it in the 80's...trust me, the game was boring,played with little passion, and whilst there were some really big names who did a great deal of good for counties back then, the majority of the players were worse than they are today...maybe not skill wise (although the fielding is vastly superior today), but attitude wise, maybe there is just a lot more riding on it today money wise.

agree with you about the Kolpack thing though...in the next few years that could have a serious implication on the dilution of talent throughout the CC

 

[cricnewbye]

should be nice to have crcket as national game, but should be nice to have it a "known" game as well, in most european countries pll dont even know what is about, sad

 

[Richard]

you dont feel the standard has increaed because you never saw it in the 80's...trust me, the game was boring,played with little passion, and whilst there were some really big names who did a great deal of good for counties back then, the majority of the players were worse than they are today...maybe not skill wise (although the fielding is vastly superior today), but attitude wise, maybe there is just a lot more riding on it today money wise.

And yet there are still proliferations of players who make it clear they hate the county game. Many recognise the fact that the English game is far more lucrative than the South African, West Indian, Australian, Kiwi, etc. ones to be a large problem.
Too many are worried only about earning their next contract, not doing their best for the good of the English game.
Read Angus Fraser's "twighlight of the revolutionaries" (if you can get it online)... he makes a good point in the last paragraph.

agree with you about the Kolpack thing though...in the next few years that could have a serious implication on the dilution of talent throughout the CC

Aha! Fear not (hopefully). Help may be at hand. The latest draft for the EU Constitution recognises "the specific nature of sport". Kolpak and EU-Passport players just may be a thing of the past before too long.
Knowing The EU (as any large organization), though, it'll probably take 3 years for the thing to be approved, though.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

should be nice to have crcket as national game, but should be nice to have it a "known" game as well, in most european countries pll dont even know what is about, sad

Word. Trying my best to educate Norwegians, but it's going slowly to say the least...