Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

cheekybeeboo t1_iwxelmc wrote

Reply to comment by YouthfulDrake in Cricket could return to Olympics with six-team T20 competition by Buckeye_8621

Yep, I agree. The litmus test should be if winning an Olympic gold medal is the highest aspiration for the athlete and/or team in question. In running, swimming, archery, gymnastics -- etc, etc -- that is a definite yes. But soccer, cricket, tennis, baseball, rugby? No way. Therefore, don't include as it's unnecessary bloat.

9

WaynneGretzky t1_iwzhx4b wrote

Sure olympics is a major event. But its a fact that the event is usually a loss making investment for the hosts.

>Every single Olympics since 1960 has gone over budget.

Source

Most sports are barely watched by people at the venues, so increased tourism is in itself a hoax. Tracks & infra development cant be used later turning into NPA eventually. Sports like cricket, rugby can actually bring the viewership. Adding more water sports is just going to increase the irrelevant costs with low returns. There's always debate around wrestling, boxing, which brings large viewership from asian countries.

And for anyone representing in a sport, the highest aspiration isn't the event, its winning for the team/country.

4