CWGs 2022/2026

[Alexjc]

A poll mainly just to feel out everybody's opinions during the pre build up to the pointless decider for the 2018 event later in the year.

[baron-pierreIV]

Alex, after the disastrous side-effex of FIFA's 2018-2022 experiment, I don't think anyone is going to try another double-awarding any time in the near future.

[Rob2012]

Alex, after the disastrous side-effex of FIFA's 2018-2022 experiment, I don't think anyone is going to try another double-awarding any time in the near future.

Beat me to it, well put.

[Sir Rols]

Definitely no surprises that dual-awardings is on the nose right now - rightly.

As for the sports - well, Rugby Leagues already been approved. But to me I think its unlikely it'll ever feature in a games. Apart from the notion of why'd you'd stage it when Rugby 7s is already compulsory, the only ones that would ever be likely to propose it as potential hosts from NSW or Qld in Oz and maybe northern England. The Gold Coast doesn't have it on their proposals, and it will take care of any Qld hosting chances for a looooong time to come. Ditto I can't see a NSW bidder interested for a long time. As for England - well, I can't see the likes of Huddersfield putting in a bid any time soon.

20-20 cricket? It's an obvious inclusion IMO, and such a pity that Delhi didn't feature it. But that seems more to do with the ICCs attitude than the CGF's.

[Alexjc]

Guys, FIFA and the CGF are two totally different beasts!

The Commonwealth is probibly least corruptible of the major sports bodies. Still...

[Sir Rols]

The Commonwealth is probibly least corruptible of the major sports bodies. Still...

Not according to certain parties. I hear they can be bought for a crate of Scotch Whisky.

[intoronto]

Cricket should not be added due to the face only about 7 countries are competitive. The same with Rugby league. What would be interesting is a 16 team soccer tournament.

Group A: Scotland, Cameroon, Wales, Trinidad and Tobago

Group B: Australia, South Africa, New Zealand, Jamaica

Group C: England, Zambia, Northern Ireland, Botswana

Group D: Nigeria, Canada, Ghana, India

Hamilton did propose this for the 2010 CWG. Not a far fetched idea.

[Sir Rols]

Cricket should not be added due to the face only about 7 countries are competitive. The same with Rugby league. What would be interesting is a 16 team soccer tournament.

Group A: Scotland, Cameroon, Wales, Trinidad and Tobago

Group B: Australia, South Africa, New Zealand, Jamaica

Group C: England, Zambia, Northern Ireland, Botswana

Group D: Nigeria, Canada, Ghana, India

Hamilton did propose this for the 2010 CWG. Not a far fetched idea.

Cricket has a very successful World Cup - and just about every contender there IS a Commonwealth country - the likes of the Netherlands and the USA only end up there to make up some early numbers before the real rounds. Plus, cricket was successfully staged at the Kuala Lumpur CWGs of 1998. I mean it IS just about THE Commonweralth sport par excellence - IMO it's very fitting it has a place alongside the likes of Rugby, Netball and Lawn Bowls etc at the CWGs. And I'm not even a cricket follower! Plus in the cricketing nations like Oz, England, NZ, South Africa and especially India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, it has HUGE potential viewer appeal.

Rugby League - yeah, fair enough. Even with the best of best of tweaking and encouragement, it's basically Oz, England and NZ - maybe Papua New Guinea (the only country where RL is the national sport)- and then f**k all else interested in it.

I think the problem with soccer/football is the incredibly crowded calendar of FIFA sanctioned events already. It's pretty hard to slot in another one for a grouping (the Commonwealth) that doesn't mean much to FIFA and further puts pressure on the old issue of allowing club players time out to compete for their countries.

[intoronto]

Cricket has a very successful World Cup - and just about every contender there IS a Commonwealth country - the likes of the Netherlands and the USA only end up there to make up some early numbers before the real rounds. Plus, cricket was successfully staged at the Kuala Lumpur CWGs of 1998. I mean it IS just about THE Commonweralth sport par excellence - IMO it's very fitting it has a place alongside the likes of Rugby, Netball and Lawn Bowls etc at the CWGs. And I'm not even a cricket follower! Plus in the cricketing nations like Oz, England, NZ, South Africa and especially India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, it has HUGE potential viewer appeal.

Rugby League - yeah, fair enough. Even with the best of best of tweaking and encouragement, it's basically Oz, England and NZ - maybe Papua New Guinea (the only country where RL is the national sport)- and then f**k all else interested in it.

I think the problem with soccer/football is the incredibly crowded calendar of FIFA sanctioned events already. It's pretty hard to slot in another one for a grouping (the Commonwealth) that doesn't mean much to FIFA and further puts pressure on the old issue of allowing club players time out to compete for their countries.

The USA has never qualified for a Cricket World Cup. In fact 12 out of the 14 teams were from the Commonwealth last World Cup. However, one has to believe the teams sent will not be the strongest (India sent a C team to the Asian Games). The 1998 tournament was not considered a success as well. Football is the world sport I think its a good choice.

[Sir Rols]

The USA has never qualified for a Cricket World Cup. In fact 12 out of the 14 teams were from the Commonwealth last World Cup. However, one has to believe the teams sent will not be the strongest (India sent a C team to the Asian Games). The 1998 tournament was not considered a success as well. Football is the world sport I think its a good choice.

For 20/20, there's a good chance they would send the best. But that's up to the ICC (it was their intransigence over guaranteeing best teams that stopped Delhi offering cricket).

I don't know about lack of success in 1998 - it got very strong coverage here in Oz.

And sure, soccer is a world sport - with its own WCs, continental cups, confederation cups, u-17s WCs, the Olympics etc etc etc already. And the big problem with it at the CWGs is it clashes directly with the FIFA WC in the same year.

Cricket is a Commonwealth sport immensely popular in many of the largest Commonwealth member countries - far, far more than football in the likes of Oz, NZ, India, Pakistan etc.

And, actually, thinking of football and the Olympics, it's not like Football is THE blue riband event of the SOGs - the Olympics wouldn't miss football and I doubt it would have much impact on popularity and viewership of the games. Conversely, the real blue riband events of the Olympics - athletics and swimming - are hardly super-popular viewing sports in the years between Olympiads.

[Alexjc]

A pity really, Football would be really great in the CWGs.

What about an under 21 or 25 rule?

[baron-pierreIV]

A pity really, Football would be really great in the CWGs.

Yeah, but you see, Alex, it would just be something similar like the O's. Plus, remember the even years that the CWGs happen are ALSO the same year FIFA has its big show, the Men's World Cup.

In addition, outside of England, a CWGs excludes the traditional Football powers (so, no Argentina, Brazil, Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, etc.). Therefore, what sort of quality tournament would you have in the CWGs?

[intoronto]

Yeah, but you see, Alex, it would just be something similar like the O's. Plus, remember the even years that the CWGs happen are ALSO the same year FIFA has its big show, the Men's World Cup.

In addition, outside of England, a CWGs excludes the traditional Football powers (so, no Argentina, Brazil, Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, etc.). Therefore, what sort of quality tournament would you have in the CWGs?

Although countries like Ghana, Cameroon, Nigeria, Australia, South Africa (who all competed at the World Cup) can compete at the CWGs

[gotosy]

as Twenty20 cricket was mentioned here...

Rogge would support cricket Olympic bid

(AFP)

LONDON — International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Jacques Rogge would welcome a bid from cricket to become a sport at future games, it was reported here Tuesday.

IOC chief Rogge said in an interview with the Evening Standard that cricket could be a successful addition to the summer Olympics, although it would most likely be in the Twenty20 format.

"The International Cricket Council will decide at the end of June whether they will make an application. The incoming president might be interested. We would welcome an application," Rogge told the Standard.

"It's an important, popular sport and very powerful on television.

"It's a sport with a great tradition where mostly you have a respect of the ethics. In the Olympics, it will not be Test cricket, of course."

Cricket has appeared in the Games before, featuring in the 1900 Paris Olympics, when Britain took gold ahead of France in a competition that featured only two teams.

Rogge described himself as a devoted cricket fan, watching Test matches on television from his office in Lausanne.

"I love the game. I have watched Sachin Tendulkar, Kevin Pietersen, Shane Warne, Ian Botham. It's tactically very interesting, a game of patience, a game of great skills and the only sport where, after five days, you can have a draw!" he was quoted by the Standard as saying.

...

AFP

[Brekkie Boy]

Cricket is arguably the sport of the Commonwealth and Twenty20 would be a big boost to the games and bring some big names in too - can't believe India didn't do it really. The only downside is finding space in the calendar as the cricket season never seems to stop nowadays, and also having a format that can be played out in ten days as the ICC tend to stretch their tournaments out as long as possible!

And can't believe I'm the only one to vote in favour of joint bids. The CWG needs to take action to avoid the bid process just being an endurance race where the last city to drop out gets the games, and it's better to have 4-5 cities bidding for two games than just a couple for one games.

[intoronto]

I don't think Cricket will make the Olympics. Baseball should instead.

[Alexjc]

I don't think Cricket will make the Olympics. Baseball should instead.

I thought baseball aready was...

Cricket will be a shoe in but league...I dunno.

As for a dual bid...Yes I am amazed at the No response...But then it's not like Commonwealth citys are falling over themselves to host.

Also By 2026, the Queen will be long gone and there is a probiblity that the Commonwealth may die with her.

[Sir Rols]

I thought baseball aready was...

Nuh. Not any more. It's been dropped along with softball. Personally, I'd have preferred to keep softball - it just has that more amateur, Olympic-like stature and appeal. But I don't see any great loss with baseball - the US never released their star players, it's really only of much interest to the US, Cuba and Japan (and even if Australia has done well and medalled in it, it's still a very minor of minority sports here).

Cricket will be a shoe in but league...I dunno.

Like I said, league may be on the CWGs sports roster now, but I'd be highly surprised if it was EVER proposed by a host.

As for a dual bid...Yes I am amazed at the No response...But then it's not like Commonwealth citys are falling over themselves to host.

Also By 2026, the Queen will be long gone and there is a probiblity that the Commonwealth may die with her.

For an event you're so keen to diss, the CWGs seem to account for 99 per cent of your posts here.

[Alexjc]

I'm not dissing (if that is a word) the CWGs Rols...I'm criticizing the fact that it's far too expensive for what they are worth in the global scheme of things. We are adding sports that do cost. CWGs now sits firmly in the second tier level of multi-sport events, yet host citys - and their nations - are left funding massive infrastructure to satisfy global desire. The games don't need a 'brand new stadium and or swimming pool', they should be able to be hosted in your everyday commonwealth city. Fair enough to those who want to build a venue for them as part of a future legacy, but don't deny potental hosts the right by making them out of reach. Manchester 2002 (IMO the best CWGs) was as big as they needed to be. Victoria 1994, although panned as being 'budget' proved that the CWGs are affordable to even the smallest cities.

As for Rugby League, considering it's dominated by a dodgy Australian cabal, the NRL, I'd say no to it on those grounds alone.

[arwebb]

I don't think Cricket will make the Olympics. Baseball should instead.

Would love to hear the argument in favour of the second part of that post.

I'm not dissing (if that is a word) the CWGs Rols...I'm criticizing the fact that it's far too expensive for what they are worth in the global scheme of things. We are adding sports that do cost. CWGs now sits firmly in the second tier level of multi-sport events, yet host citys - and their nations - are left funding massive infrastructure to satisfy global desire. The games don't need a 'brand new stadium and or swimming pool', they should be able to be hosted in your everyday commonwealth city. Fair enough to those who want to build a venue for them as part of a future legacy, but don't deny potental hosts the right by making them out of reach. Manchester 2002 (IMO the best CWGs) was as big as they needed to be. Victoria 1994, although panned as being 'budget' proved that the CWGs are affordable to even the smallest cities.

Probably the most sense I've read posted about the Commonwealths for quite some time.

[intoronto]

Would love to hear the argument in favour of the second part of that post.

Probably the most sense I've read posted about the Commonwealths for quite some time.

The only country that would oppose cricket when hosting would be Canada, Scotland, Wales or any any African country besides South Africa (ie Nigeria).