Interesting dicussion on Sky News just now. Some bloke called Ellis, a “football sociologist” (what? Is? That?), was asked: “has cricket stolen his heart?”
“Well my heart maybe with Football, but no other part of me is: I’m fatigued by Football, it’s not competitive any longer. The beauty of cricket is it’s exactly that- intensely competitive. We’re seeing a genuine competition. I’d like to say it’ll be with us for a long time to come [Britain's 'new' love of the game], but I think we’ve seen it all before. Remember after we won the Rugby world cup? Jonny Wilkinson was going to be the new David Beckam – none of that happened. Once the Ashes is over we may forget about Cricket.”
And this is an important point. My Editor at Cricinfo interviewed Martin Corry a week ago, England’s Rugby Union Captain, who was coy about the effect winning the Ashes could have on Cricket in this country. Read the interview here.
The Sky bloke went on to ask, “Are Flintoff, Strauss, Trescothick and so on going to become characters that the public identify with, in same way Beckham, Owen and Gerrard have been?”
“Flintoff certainly has [become a character the public love], and he’s been very charismatic. The big market capture is women, who are now watching the game. Young people are now out there batting and bowling, aquanting themselves with the game.”
There was a bit of discussion on the Cricket v Football debate here, a week ago, and for more on this see my Football tag.
I’m sorry, that doesn’t hold water. When he says ‘The beauty of cricket is it’s exactly that- intensely competitive,’ he is not referring to anything intrinsic in the game of cricket, but the competition of two very good teams. He isn’t referring to England vs Bangladesh, Zimbabwe vs New Zealand, or Kent vs Glamorgan.
I cannot for the life of me understand why the desire is so great for some people to compare their favourite sport to football; or, indeed, compare any two sports.
The media fuss about the new ‘popularity’ of cricket is nonsense. The Ashes sold out even when most people expected England to fight hard – and lose. FiveLive endlessly witters on about football, even through the summer, completely ignoring the existing popularity of cricket. Every weekend up and down the land there’s cricket matches everywhere, and it’s only the media elite who don’t seem to notice this. The fact that cricket is ignore by the tabloids – and tabloid radio shows – doesn’t mean it’s not popular, and the Ashes success merely means the football morons have finally woken up to what we all know already – that cricket is an infinitely more interesting sport.
I don’t think cricket is ‘infinitely’ more interesting than football. Does that make me a ‘football moron’? When I next go to watch a county match, will I be turned away at the gate for daring to enjoy football as well?
More importantly, if you are so certain that you don’t care about football, why worry about it?
sorry, must be old and daft, but I fail to understand what this Ellis bloke is saying: I thought that first-class sport is ALL about competition. (I only know of 3 sports where there is no competition, Aikido, Tai-chi and Ki-no-michi, but millions love them too).
The saddest thing of all is that, while the media is championing cricket on the basis of this Ashes series right now, where is the pressure group in England, pushing the Government to put cricket back on the protected list? Are these new-found fans howling for the gonads of those who sold cricket to Sky? I hear no-one.
Will, please, get cricinfo to burn a few of these glory newspapers and stick ‘em in an urn, present it to the ECB in 6 months time, to remind them of the death of English mainstream cricket fandom.
i think what he is talking about are all the factors in cricket that make it competitive and what he loves about it. Such as the fact it lasts 5 days and you have so many twists and turns that could change the match; there are bowlers running into bowl trying to get wickets, while batsman concentrate furiously to get runs. My point is, i don’t think he’s talking about it being more competitive between fans or clubs or a more even competition, but simply the things in cricket you have to do to win are making it more competitive (meaning all the things your trying to do with all your powers etc). This may be hard to understand but it makes sense in my mind.
i think cricket is far better than football …in football for one goal it may take 45 min .. i have to watch those 45 min just people kicking ball..but in cricket each ball delivery is important you may not know whether its out or SIX…
Cricket is a Gentleman’s game, Football, Basketball, Hockey, etc – have just one thing – GOAL, Cricket is different, infact baseball has its roots in Cricket only, See the Cricket batsman, he looks like a Gentleman when he stands and deliver, i mean Cricketers wear full to bottom, see Football players they run in shorts
I am a die hard Football fan but Cricket is the only sport which pulls me everytime
yes ,cricket is much entertaining than football in form of T20
all football leagus are there in international footballl time table .T20 is being loved in all cricket playing countries
on same way success of ipl apl{american premiur league} is also being started …..