David Edwards'Gilly' and Olympic Gold!
August 12th 2008 01:32
The venerable Adam Gilchrist's recent proclamation that 20/20 cricket should be a part of the Olympic games by the year 2020 earned quite mixed reactions from sections of the media. Not only was it a shameless attempt by Gilchrist to re-insert himself back into the glare of the public eye which he sorely misses after the seemingly endless homage that was paid to him during his last Test/One Day series; which included several video montages, countless memorabilia auctions, and a proverbial flood of bad KFC commericals designed to hammer home the fact that the golden boy was retiring. No, it was also a genuine plea to the IOC to consider cricket as an Olympic sport.
While the quixotic Gilchrist may have cricket's best interests at heart, the addition of 20/20 cricket to the Olympic games would be nothing short of farcical. Any sport that could potentially have Luke Ronchi claiming a gold medal at the end of proceedings deserves to not be an Olympic sport.
Some of Gilchrist's comments included the following:
"We have a responsibility to grow our game in new territories and amongst the women of the world."
"I believe the Olympic Games is the vehicle the sport should use to aggressively sell the message of our sport to all 202 competing Olympic nations."
While SportingMind would get a perverse kick out of seeing Australia take on Ethiopia in a cricket match for a bevy of reasons, it just won't happen. Africans are good at running, yes. But that is because the only resource they have is dry, barren land. No Institute of Sport, or Cricket Academy with Rod Marsh at the helm, no rigorous biomechanical bowling action analysis or skin-fold testing (although there would be no problems there in Ethiopia). The reason we have players such as Slammin' Shane Watson is due to the fact that Australian cricketers have been wrapped in a thick cocoon of cotton wool from the age of 13. The world is not yet globalised enough for cricket to be on the world scale.
Ahead of cricket - i would instead be pushing for rugby league to be an Olympic sport. This sport seems more acquainted with the image of oiled up Athenians hurling oddly shaped shot-puts in 1896 and prior to. Cricket is too naff a sport to be in the Olympics - even in its Hollywood, commercialised version of the sport (20-20). Having rugby league in the Olympics would also fulfil my kinky desire to have Ray Warren back on board calling an Olympic sport.
Now for off-topic ramblings; yesterday i was sitting on my couch watching Sky News - when a news bulletin hit the screen. Intrigued, i took heed, to find that the headline was "Concern that Australia may drop below 4th place in the medal tally this Olympics". Concern? Yet another typically asinine headline from Sky News.
Still on the Olympics - where are the tears this year? I want tears. Tears of joy/desperation/failure, i don't care, all i know is that i want them, many of them. Streaming down the face of people like Libby Trickett (?), Stephanie Rice, Grant Hackett, et al. To be honest i expected tears from Trickett yesterday, but instead i got nothing but a toothy grin reminiscent of a young Ronaldinho. Thats the last time i post a supportive message on the "Hero Wall" website to Trickett.
-SportingMind
While the quixotic Gilchrist may have cricket's best interests at heart, the addition of 20/20 cricket to the Olympic games would be nothing short of farcical. Any sport that could potentially have Luke Ronchi claiming a gold medal at the end of proceedings deserves to not be an Olympic sport.
Some of Gilchrist's comments included the following:
"We have a responsibility to grow our game in new territories and amongst the women of the world."
"I believe the Olympic Games is the vehicle the sport should use to aggressively sell the message of our sport to all 202 competing Olympic nations."
While SportingMind would get a perverse kick out of seeing Australia take on Ethiopia in a cricket match for a bevy of reasons, it just won't happen. Africans are good at running, yes. But that is because the only resource they have is dry, barren land. No Institute of Sport, or Cricket Academy with Rod Marsh at the helm, no rigorous biomechanical bowling action analysis or skin-fold testing (although there would be no problems there in Ethiopia). The reason we have players such as Slammin' Shane Watson is due to the fact that Australian cricketers have been wrapped in a thick cocoon of cotton wool from the age of 13. The world is not yet globalised enough for cricket to be on the world scale.
Ahead of cricket - i would instead be pushing for rugby league to be an Olympic sport. This sport seems more acquainted with the image of oiled up Athenians hurling oddly shaped shot-puts in 1896 and prior to. Cricket is too naff a sport to be in the Olympics - even in its Hollywood, commercialised version of the sport (20-20). Having rugby league in the Olympics would also fulfil my kinky desire to have Ray Warren back on board calling an Olympic sport.
Now for off-topic ramblings; yesterday i was sitting on my couch watching Sky News - when a news bulletin hit the screen. Intrigued, i took heed, to find that the headline was "Concern that Australia may drop below 4th place in the medal tally this Olympics". Concern? Yet another typically asinine headline from Sky News.
Still on the Olympics - where are the tears this year? I want tears. Tears of joy/desperation/failure, i don't care, all i know is that i want them, many of them. Streaming down the face of people like Libby Trickett (?), Stephanie Rice, Grant Hackett, et al. To be honest i expected tears from Trickett yesterday, but instead i got nothing but a toothy grin reminiscent of a young Ronaldinho. Thats the last time i post a supportive message on the "Hero Wall" website to Trickett.
-SportingMind
| 33 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Subscribe to this blog
