only Yanks can revitalize world cricket

[copernicus]

Re: Indoor Cricket Cup- G'day USA 2007

I know this has been moved from one thread to another, so I am not so sure that timmyj51 is responsible for this quote (above), but I ask whoever is responsible: since when was cricket a vehicle for, or as seemingly implied, solely a part of Aussie culture? Not Indian or West Indian culture? Not Pakistani or South African culture? Let alone of course, and above all others, English (or British) Culture? Why Australian businesses and not others?

Australia may be the world's best at the moment, but this was not always the case in the past and may not, or more probably will not always be the case in the future. So why should Aussie culture (or more properly business, if I understand the author correctly ) usurp the game as its very own to promote itself?

Isn't that a touch arrogant ?

I think you're missing the context here. The game is taking place during Australia Week or some such - when Aussie businesses in the US are promoting themselves. The cricket contest is a by-product of that, so it's not as though the cricket match is a stand-alone thing. There are a bunch of other 'cultural' goings on, though I can't remember exactly what they are. Given cricket's place in Australian culture, it seems natural that it would be part of a week involving Australian culture.

 

[Langarne]

Re: Indoor Cricket Cup- G'day USA 2007

In that the US is ranked alongside such genuinely fine cricketing nations as, The Netherlands, Kenya, Denmark and Ireland, amongst 28 others.

And that is about where they are at in the present climate.

We must assume the USACA is "behind" their place in the cricketing hierarchy, or are we to imagine that the USACA believe that the US should have test status at present?

No association or governing body is behind where they sit in ICC status and/or ranking.Countries do not 'choose' what level of member they are.In fact it is probably a little more honest than most.Unlike FIFA who have a ridiculous ranking system that seems to benefit more the countries that play the most meaningless games as opposed to how good they actually are, the ICC status/rankings are a little more reality based in where most countries sit.They don't necessarily always get the individual rankings spot on, but they are pretty close in terms of membership levels.

 

[Langarne]

Re: Indoor Cricket Cup- G'day USA 2007

since when was cricket a vehicle for, or as seemingly implied, solely a part of Aussie culture? Not Indian or West Indian culture? Not Pakistani or South African culture? Let alone of course, and above all others, English (or British) Culture? Why Australian businesses and not others?

Who cares, what does it matter? Cricket is cricket.

Australia may be the world's best at the moment, but this was not always the case in the past and may not, or more probably will not always be the case in the future. So why should Aussie culture (or more properly business, if I understand the author correctly ) usurp the game as its very own to promote itself?

The English invented cricket, as they did soccer.But it has been a part of Australian culture since 1877.Even before that actually when an aboriginal side toured England.These 'businesses' that are in question are obviously Australian, so I really fail to see if they are using cricket as a 'vehicle', why they would be highlighting Pakistan, South Africa, England or the West Indies and not their own team, who just happen to be the best in world by far, have been for the last 10 years and the landscape in that regard doesn't look like changing for some time yet.

Isn't that a touch arrogant ?

I think you're getting away from the point.How is it arrogant?

 

[Mudassar Nazar]

Re: only Yanks can revitalize world cricket

McCricket. Love the idea.

 

[Zebedee]

Re: Indoor Cricket Cup- G'day USA 2007

I think you're missing the context here. The game is taking place during Australia Week or some such - when Aussie businesses in the US are promoting themselves. The cricket contest is a by-product of that, so it's not as though the cricket match is a stand-alone thing. There are a bunch of other 'cultural' goings on, though I can't remember exactly what they are. Given cricket's place in Australian culture, it seems natural that it would be part of a week involving Australian culture.

Ahhh... then yes, I did miss the context.

Question: Is/Was that quintessentially Aussie game, Australian Rules Football, promoted in similar fashion or was such a notion promoted before cricket. By comparison "Footy" in Oz is of greater cultural (and unique) import than cricket by 3 to 1.

Cricket is what Australia displays to the rest of the world (amongst other sports) but Aussie Rules Football is its well kept secret, is what it plays and what it thinks of itself.

Just a thought.

 

[copernicus]

Re: Indoor Cricket Cup- G'day USA 2007

Ahhh... then yes, I did miss the context.

Question: Is/Was that quintessentially Aussie game, Australian Rules Football, promoted in similar fashion or was such a notion promoted before cricket. By comparison "Footy" in Oz is of greater cultural (and unique) import than cricket by 3 to 1.

Cricket is what Australia displays to the rest of the world (amongst other sports) but Aussie Rules Football is its well kept secret, is what it plays and what it thinks of itself.

Just a thought.

I couldn't tell you. I do know that they have a similar festival in Nashville, where an Aussie Rules team is based, and they usually have some sort of exhibition match or some such. You'd have to go look up the site - it's in the thread about the cricket match in the first post (australia-week.com or something).

I wouldn't say that Aussie Rules is any more representative of Aussie kultcha than cricket is - both are fundamental aspects of our sporting fabric, the only difference being that one is home-grown and one isn't, but that's not to say that cricket isn't as integral a part of culture than footy is. I guess it could be that it's cricket season now and that's why they might have chosen a cricket match over a footy game, if that is what they have done - hard to say.

 

[Stamislav]

Re: only Yanks can revitalize world cricket

Wasn't Australian rules football designed to be played on cricket ovals?

If so, does that mean you can play other sports on a field that has a turf wicket on it? How come I can't see the wicket when I see highlights of Aussie rules?

 

[Zebedee]

Re: Indoor Cricket Cup- G'day USA 2007

And that is about where they are at in the present climate.
No association or governing body is behind where they sit in ICC status and/or ranking.Countries do not 'choose' what level of member they are.In fact it is probably a little more honest than most.Unlike FIFA who have a ridiculous ranking system that seems to benefit more the countries that play the most meaningless games as opposed to how good they actually are, the ICC status/rankings are a little more reality based in where most countries sit.They don't necessarily always get the individual rankings spot on, but they are pretty close in terms of membership levels.

I am not sure I understand your point about the USA's current ranking (can anyone tell me what the US ranking is?) Nor if I explained sufficiently so that you understood my point: But, of course countries do not choose the level of membership they have, but they can, and do, lobby for an improvement and the USACA do not lobby too hard (in case you wonder who does, look to Holland who lobby hard for test status, and have a case in my opinion). The first half of this thread (before posts were moved over) was that the USA will save cricket and yet the USACA do little to improve their own lot.Let alone anyone else's.

I understand your point about the strangeness of FIFA's ranking system, but the ICC's is not better, but a lot worse. In fact (though this is not a debate about FIFA) FIFA's rankings whilst inequitable are better than the ICC's. I can go to the FIFA web site and find the USA's ranking with no trouble. Do the same for the ICC and you get very, very lost if looking for a straight answer. Because in the ICC rankings, there is no straight answer. Try it yourself if you don't believe me:

http://www.icc-cricket.com

(maybe I've been missing something)

"They don't necessarily always get the individual rankings spot on, but they are pretty close in terms of membership levels."

I am not sure what you are trying to say here, but I do not see how membership levels correlate with ICC rankings in any way. If you were to apply this to FIFA, how would membership of any soccer/football club have anything to do with the national side: Does membership of Pairs SG or Lyon have anything to do with the ranking of the French football side? Likewise: does membership of The MCC or the SACA have anything to do with the ranking of the England or Australian teams? No.At least I don't believe so.

 

[Zebedee]

Re: Indoor Cricket Cup- G'day USA 2007

Who cares, what does it matter? Cricket is cricket.

The English invented cricket, as they did soccer.But it has been a part of Australian culture since 1877.Even before that actually when an aboriginal side toured England.These 'businesses' that are in question are obviously Australian, so I really fail to see if they are using cricket as a 'vehicle', why they would be highlighting Pakistan, South Africa, England or the West Indies and not their own team, who just happen to be the best in world by far, have been for the last 10 years and the landscape in that regard doesn't look like changing for some time yet.

I think you're getting away from the point.How is it arrogant?

Not that it matters now that I have been corrected as to the context; but is it not arrogant to claim cricket as Australia's own (perhaps not) for the purposes of business? It's just a question. But is that all that Australian sport is? The game of the colonial past, where a great Aussie game exsists ie, football?

 

[Zebedee]

Re: Indoor Cricket Cup- G'day USA 2007

I wouldn't say that Aussie Rules is any more representative of Aussie kultcha than cricket is - both are fundamental aspects of our sporting fabric, the only difference being that one is home-grown and one isn't, but that's not to say that cricket isn't as integral a part of culture than footy is. I guess it could be that it's cricket season now and that's why they might have chosen a cricket match over a footy game, if that is what they have done - hard to say.

This is turning away from the topic....

I have evidently missed something about where this Aus/US cultural exchange is happening. Is it in the northern hemisphere? Where winter games, like AFL, are played? Or is it in down south? Either way, I must have just missed it.

In any event if you are going to plug Australian sporting culture, why cricket? I thought there was the possibility of AFL. There is after all that the odd game of "International Rules" every year so why not apply the proper rules when there is a US Aussie Rules league.

Australia is three-odd weeks into the cricket season, the AFL grand Final was two months ago, back in late September and the top sporting news commentary has, until the arrival of the England touring side, been about AFL sides training,AFL player injuries, AFL coach and player departures, AFL trades, AFL this, AFL that and AFL the other.... And it has continued after that. BE FAIR it never really goes away? It's all pervasive. How does this not reflect Aussie sporting culture? Not all culture of course, just sport.

Australians love to project CRICKET as the national game on to the rest of the world, but back home the real (and culturally unique) game is AFL Football. And it would be more honest to sell that great game to the rest of the world, to the USA or otherwise.

I don't know, I was just thinking about it.

 

[Zebedee]

Re: only Yanks can revitalize world cricket

Wasn't Australian rules football designed to be played on cricket ovals?

I have been told, that in times past, it was a way of keeping cricket players fit during the winter months. But I don't buy it. It would mean a permanent professional team, in a time of the "Gentleman Player" and the amateur.

BUT I also understand that there is some archaeological evidence (found in the state of Victoria), that might suggest that an earlier and similar to Aussie rules game was played by Aborigines before Europeans arrived in Australia.

If so, does that mean you can play other sports on a field that has a turf wicket on it? How come I can't see the wicket when I see highlights of Aussie rules?

The wicket is easily grown-over. Especially in the lush conditions of most Aussie grounds. Failing that, they can be dug-out and Australian groundsmen are masters of the turf and turf repair.

 

[Dave]

Re: only Yanks can revitalize world cricket

I have been told, that in times past, it was a way of keeping cricket players fit during the winter months. But I don't buy it...

Australian rules was started to keep cricketers fit in winter

See an extract from the letter written by Thomas Wentworth Wills……...the games founder

Letter from Tom Wills

".........SIR, - Now that cricket has been put aside for some few months to come, and cricketers have assumed somewhat of the chrysalis nature (for a time only 'tis true), but at length will again burst forth in all their varied hues, rather than allow this state of torpor to creep over them, and stifle their new supple limbs, why can they not, I say, form a foot-ball club, and form a committee of three or four to draw up a code of laws?......."

It would mean a permanent professional team, in a time of the "Gentleman Player" and the amateur..

It would not have meant a permanent professional team

What would of happened......... and what did happen for the next 120 years.......people played cricket in summer and they played football in winter

 

[Chandu]

Re: only Yanks can revitalize world cricket

BUT I also understand that there is some archaeological evidence (found in the state of Victoria), that might suggest that an earlier and similar to Aussie rules game was played by Aborigines before Europeans arrived in Australia.

You are correct. Do a Google search for "Marn Grook".

 

[Dave]

Re: only Yanks can revitalize world cricket

Marn Grook
From the Gunditjamara people, meaning "Game Ball"

 

[timmyj51]

Re: only Yanks can revitalize world cricket

Yanks shelled out, this year $365 million to watch major league baseball.
$365 million to watch guys throw a ball, hit a ball, catch a ball, score
runs and....hey! wait a minute! Isn't there another game where guys
throw a ball, hit a ball, etc? Get the hint?

 

[Dave]

Re: only Yanks can revitalize world cricket

Cricket tournament a first for South Florida

 

[Mudassar Nazar]

Re: only Yanks can revitalize world cricket

Yanks shelled out, this year $365 million to watch major league baseball.
$365 million to watch guys throw a ball, hit a ball, catch a ball, score
runs and....hey! wait a minute! Isn't there another game where guys
throw a ball, hit a ball, etc? Get the hint?

It would be fantastic to see Warnie spitting a big wad of tobacco at Kevin Pieterson from his position at first slip.

 

[timmyj51]

Re: only Yanks can revitalize world cricket

"It would be fantastic to see Warnie spitting a big wad of tobacco at Kevin Pieterson from his position at first slip."



Yeah, he wouldn't be able to make racial slurs with a mouth full of
tobacco.

 

[Mudassar Nazar]

Re: only Yanks can revitalize world cricket

"It would be fantastic to see Warnie spitting a big wad of tobacco at Kevin Pieterson from his position at first slip."



Yeah, he wouldn't be able to make racial slurs with a mouth full of
tobacco.

I always thought that one complimented the other. Throw in shot guns and 1940 model pickup trucks and we're all just Yankie Doodle Dandy.

 

[Stamislav]

Re: only Yanks can revitalize world cricket

I always thought that one complimented the other. Throw in shot guns and 1940 model pickup trucks and we're all just Yankie Doodle Dandy.

I am offended.