Message Board Archives

West Indies spinner, Sunil Narine, believes that cricket’s T10 format could be the best choice for inclusion at the Olympic Games as it is even more exciting than the T20 version.

Cricket has not been played at the Olympic Games since 1900, where Britain and France were the only two teams that participated.  There have, however, been numerous discussions geared towards reviving the sport at the Games in recent years, with T20 cricket identified as the best format.  Narine, however, believes that T10 could also be a consideration.

“The T10 format is more exciting than the T20 format. In T20s, the batters take a few overs before starting their attacking skills, however, in T10 the batters probably look for only one or two balls,” Narine told the Daily Times.

Read more at SportsMax

T20 is fine enough. Heck the Commonwealth Games did just fine with 50-overs matches.

I've never heard the suggestion that basketball switch to a 20-minute contest, nor soccer. I haven't heard of baseball switching to a 5-innings contest.

I'd prefer T-20 if anything. Why push for a format in the Olympics that hasn't even picked up steam globally, instead of one that's already well established?

In reply to bdaTryangle

I think the BCCI backed by the ICC blocked T/20 being used at the Commonwealth Games about 15 years ago.

In reply to bdaTryangle

I agree that T20's are short enough, if that could be change, I would prefer T25's which would be a half contest of the 50-over matches. However, for the Olympics I could be interested in T15's, as it would have more substance and strategizing involve and as I guess the international random viewers might have issues with the match duration if the games are longer.

Must accommodate approx5 different bowlers, power plays and fielding restrictions. Must still be recognisable as cricket and not poor man’s baseball.
So T10 doesn’t work, nor T5s.

I like the T25 idea but since it’s an unproven format maybe it’s premature to endorse

What I don't like about T10s as a suggestion is that they're based on speed of a match, and as I mentioned earlier, nobody's suggested Olympic basketball or baseball, etc., get such treatment.

You may as well make it T-10 but 8-a-side, or 6-a-side. Or as I saw one person joke online yesterday, "since nothing's more exciting than a Super Over, why not have the competition be a single Super Over".

With the upcoming Commonwealth Games I trust that the women's game will run smoothly enough that the ICC is encouraged a bit more to push for a proper proposal to the Olympics folks.

When will it end?
Next I'll be hearing about B-10 cricket.
10 balls per side.

In reply to culpepperboy

It'll be indoors too, with a rubber ball and a 15-minute clock. Scoring will be adjusted - instead of 4s and 6s it'll be 5s and 10s, to make it easier to understand. Will be the most exciting thing yet.

In reply to bdaTryangle

I saw highlights of a match that was indoors that had Gayle and Russell. Here it is

Ultimate Kricket Challenge

Lets sekkle for T5 ...

Coming up with a qualification system may be difficult.

Finding time in the calendar to prepare one and the issue of separate nations from the West Indies & a team GB would be obstacles.

In reply to WICFan

The Commonwealth Games/women's tourney appears to have offered one fix with regard to WI teams.

For a potential Olympics I think I'd rather have regional/global/second-chance qualifiers... for the men's game that becomes extra tricky of course.

In reply to ThisIsMyName

That was entertaining