A couple of decades ago, Indians had just two options of entertainment: cricket and Bollywood. India’s middle class was relatively small and subdued, and its purchasing power wasn’t too great. So it wasn’t a commercial force in the world of cricket. This changed when India began to liberalise, however half-heartedly, in 1991, and one of the world’s largest latent markets opened up to the world. The middle class burgeoned, as did the purchasing power of cricket fans across the country, and satellite television made cricket easy to commercialise. Everything came together well, and cricket in India became big money. All of that is oft-repeated and well documented.

But something else also began to happen, albiet more slowly and less visibly. The alternatives to cricket as entertainment increased. It wasn’t just cricket and Bollywood anymore: there were a host of things to watch on satellite television, and many more places to hang out in one's free time. The implication of that is that when I watch a game of cricket today – whether it lasts five days or one – I ignore many more claimants to my time than I did two decades ago. The opportunity cost of my watching cricket goes up all the time.

(When it comes to playing cricket instead of just watching it, this could also explain why the best young cricketers today are coming from the smaller towns of India, not from the big cities. The big cities have developed more rapidly, and cricket faces much more competition for young people’s time there than in small cities, which are still on an upward curve.)

So here’s what I see happening in the next few years: as the country keeps developing and opening up (and I hope it does!), people will find more and more ways of spending their time. Cricket viewership will decline. This will especially affect Test cricket, but it will affect one-day cricket as well – who can spend eight to ten hours watching a mere game of cricket? (I remember Mukul making this point on a TV show as well.) This process could be exacerbated if India performs badly over an extended period of time, or stretched out if India has a couple of good years, but it is hard to see how it will halt. Revenues from cricket will go down. And all of this will be a darned good thing, because it will force the BCCI into action.

Today, when the game is lucrative by default, the BCCI has no incentive to reform itself and become more professional. It effectively has a monopoly over the game in India. But while the BCCI has no competition as far as administering the game is concerned, cricket itself does. And when that competition begins to affect the bottomline, the BCCI will react, for its own sake. That’s when it will take measures to make the game thrive again. And what will those measures be?

The BCCI will look at cricket’s biggest weakness – the long time that it takes to play a game of cricket and the costs it imposes on viewers – and conclude that a shorter form of the game is necessary to bring the crowds in again. It will promote Twenty20 cricket heavily. It might even bring in overseas players and try to create the kind of cricketing league Mukul had envisaged in this essay.

If enough people want to watch the longer forms of the game, they will not die out. I fancy this is far more likely to happen if at least one version of the game draws large audiences and big money. Even if Test cricket is no longer the “default form” of the game, as Mukul puts it, it has benefited from one-day cricket, in two ways. One, it has imbibed values from ODI cricket in terms of fitness, fielding, professionalism and aggression that have made it a better sport. Two, it has benefited from the collateral effect of the big money that one-day cricket has drawn in. The big brandnames created by ODIs also play Test cricket, and that does matter.

What do you think? Where do you think Indian cricket is headed? If you disagree with my hypothesis, then I’d be interested in knowing what kind of reforms you think Indian cricket needs, and where those reforms can realistically emanate from. Or do we have no say in this, and must it all be left to chance?

I dont think the hypothesis is correct. Just some days back when australia visited India the tickets for the test match in bangalore (quite a developed city) were hard to find. For india-SA tickets were sold in matter of hours.
Look at the developed countries Australia, England, even though there are plenty of options available over there for viewers. People still come to watch the games. I think we need more professionalism from the BCCI. Small things like having the itinerary of all the matches (ranji, duleep) in place before season starts and promoting them by making these match viewing a kinda pleasant outing for people will help.

Regards,
Naren

Hi Amit,
I think your view is pretty interesting but I feel not all angles are explored for some points.For ex, you mentioned about more cricketers coming from smaller cities than larger ones.I think your observation can be generalised in context of India's ODI team but not teams which play Ranji and other local tournaments.And that's where you find more no of people.Also with a country of such huge population it is difficult for a throbbing game like cricket, with all the emotions and economics involved to fade so easily just because some people have other options of entertainment.Moreover don't forget more people of this country live in towns and not cities.So they are yet to explore the game.Hope you would appreciate my angle.
Regards,
Prasad.

It is not India alone that has opened itself to the world. Because of Liberalisation Indians have more money and might want to do many more things than seeing cricket alone, then this holds true for other countries too.Don't forget that we have the next generation alreading baying for blood of the present cricketers and with a large population like ours interest will not peter out for the next few decades. So rest assured, cricket and the cricket mania is here to stay.

I disagree with you in couple of points. First its just not the Indian cricket that is dying out, but world cricket. Hence more emphasis has been on ICC to alter the rules to make the game more interesting and more entertaining.

Things may be moving on fast in the city. Remeber that the options that have started to come in the satellite world is still agile just like how cricket and bollywood were few years back. In some time all the crouch potatatoes would rather see something which would be different in every day rather than the same old saas-bahu dramas and millions of ruppees won by answering few worthless questions.

Things in cricket are itself changing and the competition world wide is forcing BCCI already to alter its ways. [From sacking ganguly to encouraging youngsters]. Everyone now realises the importance of bench streangth and first-class games. This infact shows in the increase in the number of viewers for the first class games.

ODI already has its effect on Tests and we can see how test matches are being finished in 4 days or lesser. And I disagree with the number of youngsters coming from lesser developed parts of India. [I suppose Gambir is from the capital of India!].

Cricket is already a profession and big city youngsters are well aware of choosing their profession as early as in school days. If anything needs to change is the politics of cricket [All the useless pressure created on the selectors to get a worthless player back to the sqaud].

I believe big things happen to those who dare to dream. India already has a dream. Go Team India!

Prashanth

Looking at how the other source of entertainment - the Hindi film industry (which you call Bollywood) has gone, I'd disagree.You can actually see a cycle everywhere. Cricket in India has mirrored the cycles of the movie industry. The mafia/underworld linkages in movies in 1993-2001 were mirrored in the match fixing scandal etc. in cricket.I use the year 2001 as a change in guard because Lagaan happened in 2001.Distribution became more transparent with the advent of multiplexes and digital cinema => Sehwag/Dhoni/Raina.This doesn't mean we don't have our Mahesh Bhatts(Saransh to Murder) =>Ganguly.The King is ready to adapt to the conditions and come out with a killer app, yet again (AB=>SRT).
The glut of money and exposure(to foreign cultures) will always result in some unhealthy surges at the beginning but things tend to stabilize and the subsequent product is of superior quality.
I don't think I'm capable of suggesting reforms but I don't think there is a reason for worrying.

india's development has shifted into upward gear just recently. small cities will become metros, towns into cities, villages into towns - this process will last decades, seeing the scale of development and our population. even if today's metro millions abstain from cricket, millions others will take their places.

The essay is interesting. However, to see whether cricket has a bright future in India or not in the age of increasing demands on time, one must look at sport broadly. First, cricket is the foremost sport in the country, and likely to remain so for a long time (till such a time as India wins a football world cup, for example). Given that, what we're really talking about is the future of sport in the country. If, as the country develops, incomes rise, so also must the value of leisure time. Where will Indians spend that time? If it is sport, it must be cricket. And as examples from the developed world have shown, to a large extent, people still spend time on sport.

The issue then boils down to how to keep cricket the premier sport in the country. This is where the BCCI comes in. It needs to professionalize. At the same time, domestic cricket needs to be made interesting enough for the audience, so that the game is not dependant on the fortunes of the national team.

Where can such a change come from? There are three possibilities:
1) The BCCI is forced to professionalize by a concerted effort from the media and the players, specially the latter, because they can effect a change.
2) A domestic league is started, playing three day games over weekends, and organized by either the Indian equivalent of Kerry Packer, or by one of the TV channels. If the organization is left to a private individual or organization, the marketing will ensure that it becomes popular. That will revolutionaize domestic cricket in India, and it will force the BCCI to change things.
3) A private organization sponsors (best done by a TV company) the Ranji Trophy and changes its format (the money will force the BCCI to think) to attract a weekend audience and ensure participation by the national stars. High prize money, proper scheduling and and effective league format to create a US baseball style league, with its own "World Series".

There are other reforms, of course, but realistically, any major reform will emanate from a private individual or organization staking plenty of money on Indian cricket. It's not impossible. The bid for TV rights for the next five years reached USD 300 million. For a fraction of that, a league can be created and managed, with TV rights, and rights to the endorsements of major players. A start could be even made with high school cricket - leveraging the popularity of the Harris Shield and similar competitions to create a national schools competition.

All it needs is a little bit of imagination from our big corporate houses. It's not impossible. It's futile to wait for the BCCI to do something.

wicketmaiden.blogspot.com

Naren, your mention of Australia and England is perfect here though for different conclusion. In Australia, for most of the matches, stadiums are empty. People prefer watching the match on TV rather than from stand. The few people seating in the stand seems more interested in sunbathing or sleeping. Its the same story in South Africa. Major cities in England are still able to pull viewers mainly due to large population of asian immigrant.

Regards,
Varun

It can never be the most prominent game in a country like ours, provided we continue doing well economically, simply for the time constraints you mentioned. With the competition provided to it by football and tennis, it will lose out in the long run. I am not saying it will be completely dead, in fact it might be even bigger than it is now, but football will be a bigger game in india.

It's like saying Football is under threat in UK....

Dream on, Amit ! There are not many sports or activities today that are not elitist. Of course, it is a contradiction of sorts that an elitist game like cricket itself has become a mass market phenomenon.

The problem does not lie in lack of competition, but, in the fact that there are not many sports / activites that the mass market can pursue at a low cost / opportunity cost. Stuff costs, and not many can afford it. Also, we have the tendency to "follow-the-crowd", making it all the more difficult to dethrone an incumbent.

I hear a lot of moaning in the MSM about how "Test Cricket" is the true form of the game etc. This is an appalling thing, promoted essentially by the British and Aussie media, and lapped up gleefully by the suck-ups in the Indian MSM. We need spectator sports, not sports that exist for their own sake, with not a care about the spectators and the value for their time. What a waste of national productivity to be following a game for 5 days, and that too in peak working hours. Why not have more day-night matches, to let people watch in leisure, rather than spoil their working hours ?

The viewing conditions are pathetic at most stadiums, with spectators treated like scum, as opposed to being treated like royalty, which is how paying customers should be. Where is the protection from weather, good restroom facilities, proper seating arrangements, dginified entry and exit ? I think cricket needs to do some soul-searching and compress its timeframe, and market itself as proper entertainment would : respect for the viewer, respect for their time etc.

Of course, all this is a pipe-dream. Who am I kidding ???

Well developement of the economy is not such a bad thing as it is made out to be. In fact i feel with the development of a bigger middle class, BCCI has the option of going to smaller centres like rajkot, kochi, etc and getting housefull crowds, which probably was unthinkable 10-15 years earlier. I think with the advent of live TV coverages the interest is only on the rise the evidence of this is the dime a dozen "Cricket Expert programmes" dished out whenever the ODIs or Tests are going on. Although anything is possible in the future but the figment of your imagination does seem to be possible only after some huge meteor hits earth and all the crazy cricket fans are wiped out of india. Until then enjoy the rejuvenation in indian cricket....Cheers Sreejith

Football takes 90 minutes to play, Jay. And cricket...

The game in its various avatars is still cricket. If the survival of which form is in question then it is hard to predict at the moment. If shorter duration is the answer then one could look at the state of Indian football. If one checks the viewership statistics of Indian football then it becomes apparent that poor performance of the Indian football teams over the past three decades is responsible for dwindling support for the game. Contrary to popular belief technology is actually giving us more opportunity to spend more time to watch a game, for instance ATMs have reduced the banking time, ECS is reducing billing time and so on. Closely faught games and not duration can ensure survival of the game even in its longest form. There should be more teams that should stand up to Australia. One of the reasons why club football thrives in England despite the winner is often limited to 2-3 teams that there are unfancied teams that could upset Chelsea or Manchester United. Cricket, especially Test cricket, is becoming a tad predictable. That Australia will win all the matches when it plays at home irrespective of the team is one the safest bets in recent years. That notion was challenged by England in the recently concluded Ashes and crowd was back. It was like watching several Twenty20 games. If cricket is to keep prospering in this country then India should have a team that could challenge any team. This needs careful planning and a complete overhaul of the infrastructure and not only a foreign coach. Also, for individual forms to survive there should a balance between all forms. On a lighter vein, play Twenty20 during the monsoon months! Where is Test cricket in India? We hardly play that form. I quite agree with Mukul that the game in this country is all ODIs.

Yes i agree with you that now more options are available to youngsters, but the fact that they are taken up is due to their ease rather than appeal necessarily.

Cricket is a game that requires substantial space, equipment, and a fair number of players for a good game. However how many young people in India have actually played a game with a proper season ball on an open field?

I grew up in India before moving abroad. It was only then that I played at a decent level in school with many players who are now county. However, back home several of my friends far more talented have never played a proper game of cricket.

Therefore, the issue here is that to compete with other sources of entertainment, the BCCI needs to make cricket more accessible at a grass root level. More attention needs to be given to develop the game at a school level.

Taking a lesson from football here in England, this is the reason the game thrives here. Kids spend sundays out on the field playing for schools, clubs. Granted this is harder in India, but that does not mean steps cannot be taken to adress the issue.

while I believe the hypothesis is pretty accurate, I suspect the actual future of indian cricket depends on just how good we get at other sports. as long as cricket remains the only sport we're half-decent at, it should continue to thrive and flourish, in whatever form. the real threat to cricket eyeballs is sania and our world cup winning 2032 soccer squad.

I recently went to India for vacations and I absolutely do not think the idiot box, starting with Soap channels and now include news channels, can compete with cricket. If it is so, it is indeed very sad. Only programmes I watched on TV during the stay were India-Sri Lanka cricket matches, Movies put up by cablewalla and a couple of serials. All rest bakwaaas....

I do not agree with the hypothesis that we will lose interest altogether in cricket as we are exposed to more entertainment. I believe cricket all over the world (and not just India) will evolve, of course, to keep up with changing tastes.

If cricket dies in India, you can be sure it will be when it has coughed and passed away long back in the rest of the world.

Cricket in India is healthy.

I have a slight disagreement with Amit's views.My belief is that sports will always retain its prominance as a form of entertainment.This is the trend in all countries-wherever they be on the economic development curve(Studies in the US have shown that for the male species in that country watching sports on TV is the most preferred form of spending time).Hence the real threat to cricket will come from other sports and not from cinema etc.

But what is the the state of non-cricket sports in India.Which sport can challenge it as a mass sport as opposed to a sport like tennis,formula 1 which will even at their peak not be able to get the attention of more than a fraction of India's population.The only threat can be football.But we are ranked 140 or something in football and lose to all and sundry.How many ads does Zee get covering Indian football.And european football can never be a substitute for good indian football as the basic core of sports watching is the notion of supporting one's team.However hard one tries,beyond a point one can't identify with ManU,Italy etc.

So what's the option for an indian regarding which sport to follow.In the near future it will be cricket and I am willing to stick my neck out and say that in the next generation atleast it will stay this way.The only change will be in the form of cricket that one will follow.Todays it's a ODI,tommorow it may be an Twenty20.But cricket it will be.All it requires is the Indian team to keep on winning the occasional match.They do not need to be world champions as long as they keep on winning the odd series.We indians will take that.Just see what came out in papers,tv news channels and general road-side discussions when India won four matches in a row against the Srilankans.We started talking about India being favorites for the World Cup in 2007!With such a support base do not worry about the state of Indian cricket for the next 25 years atleast.

I get your point and see your observations. In the interest of the game I believe that 20Twenty should be pursued big time in India without any delay. Moreover, BCCI has a ton of funds to get the 20Twenty going. However, I dont see the interest in cricket diminishing in a span of 5 years, if at all. I could see the balance shift from the larger cities to the rural or the smaller cities with the economic boom that the country is experiencing. But that too will take a long, long time. However, even in the metroes if you notice generally people have a lot of time on their hands more so than in the smaller cities.
Indian Cricket is headed more or less in the direction it is going. 20Twenty would be the way to go since globally it is gaining momentum and will be the future for years to come. More so Indian cricket could help with more sporting pitches that we have been talking about and more competitive first class cricket. They can try and corporatise first class cricket by having the different teams like mum bai, delhi be sponsored by different companies like New York Kinicks for instance. But for this the level of interest in first class cricket has to increase drastically which does not seem very likely in the near future. These reforms have to come from the BCCI. I could see Test cricket dying with years to come.

Bhisham
PA, USA

Kudos to Mukul & Amit for steering this forum from the myopic view of Dravid-Chappell combo vs Ganguly-Wright duo or the Bong vs Non-Bong fight, which was beginning to seem like the WWF.
Some of the concerns of Amit (as well as Mukul's) are well justified and being a cricket fan(atic) for donkeys years these fears in me have only become more deep rooted over a period of time. Have often wondered whether cricket will survive in its current form 50 years from now and we're talking about world cricket, which in a larger context means Indian or sub-continent cricket, since this is where the money keeps flooding the game.
One of the repercussions of ICC's (read Dalmiya & his ilk) flogging the mammon horse incessantly has been that everybody is looking at the shorter view and not the long-term one and money is in the ODIs & 20-20's (though the latter will take a bit of time to take off). Today in cricket, except for in Australia and (partly) England, popularity is highly skewed towards ODIs and mind you 20-20 has not yet hit the sub-continent radar (shudder!) because when it comes the BCCI will take to it like duck to water !

And what about the present generation of cricketers and the next ? Specially those coming from the small cities as is the trend now ? They will be more keen on the non-test variety, because of the more money (because more & more ODIs and 20-20 will be played in the future)and the lack of sense of history (with respect to test cricket). What will their coaches tell them ? To bat like Gavaskar or Dhoni ? To give the first session of the new ball to the bowler or to go hammer-n-tongs from ball one ? To bowl corridor and 3/4th length to restrict runs or to bowl full length and allow the ball to swing and get the slips to come into equation i.e. to attack the batsman for his wicket ? We still don’t know.

Funnily, though the flip side of this depressionary thinking is the step by the ICC taking cricket to new pastures. Already, China is talking and more importantly planning about becoming the No:1 cricketing nation in 10 years time. If some of these nations go on to become great or even good cricketing powers (unlike the Bangladesh & Zimbabwe experience) then there is still a ray of hope. Then India will be challenged again and probably forced to give due importance to Test Cricket, because some of these countries (specially China) can become a cricketing super-power too and threaten the ever increasing economic dominance of the BCCI.
On the BCCI’s front, there is nothing much to hope for except bulging bank accounts. The difference in getting Pawar instead of Dalmiya means getting out of a snake-pit and getting into a shark-infested ocean ! who cares ? In this squabbling, if the Govt. decides to put it’s hand into the pie, then we’ve had it.

The only way forward is to corporatise the game and the board of directors have to be ex-cricketers of repute & track record, for turning the famous CLR James poser upside down it is gone back to a time to have people ‘they only know of cricket, who only cricket know’ ! The same should happen at the ICC itself, though looks very unlikely.

What they will need to do is to bring back Test Cricket at the forefront, by marketing it properly, de-link Test & ODI itineraries, get sponsors to commit for back-to-back sponsorships, and going deeper get sponsorships for the domestic competitions right down to the under-16 & 19 levels and the school levels too & get them to be innings oriented rather than limited overs oriented which it became in the mid-80’s itself.

And last but not the least, for every NCA & MRF academy (which are more of finishing schools) we have hundreds of mushrooming coaching centres across the country. They need to be regulated (not to be read as controlled). Accredition methods may be applied by a central Academy to those coaching centres who meet pre-set criteria for coaching the future cricket stars, and theory/history must form a part of the coaching. Periodic visits by renowned ex-cricketers should be arranged to oversee progress and direction. Scholarships to specially talented pupils should be given, to have a stint at the NCA or MRF academies.

Brave New Cricket World. We’ll get there.

I don't think your view is completely correct. I don't agree that people will think that there is something else useful than watching a game of cricket. But, because of satellite telivision etc, Indian youth might find some other sports (like Basketball, soccer etc) more useful and that could reduce the amount of people taking up cricket. This is what happened in the West Indies. But, even this shouldn't kill the cricket in India because the population is very very high and there will still be some people who still likes the old game.

Amit Verma doesn't make sense. Sports in general and cricket in particular can never extinct. Just like Internet did not kill TV, TV did not kill radio, radio did not kill newspaper and newspaper did not kill gossip.

Of the methods used in managing professional sports, i like the adopt the american way of managing sports (eg: NFL/NBA)

Prinicple: There is an 'Owner' for each team who will fork money and owns the team. He pays an expert - President to run the operations. The president has several functions reporting to him - Coach, VP of personnel, VP of business development & promotion, vp of stadium maintenance amongst others.

Team Structure: Translating the same to Indian cricket, we would have 16 'tier 1' teams that would act as the owner of cricket in India. Apart from these 16 tier-1 teams, you could have multiple tier-II teams that funnel down the pyramid.

Team Owners: The 16 national teams can be 'bought' much like the american sports team. the preference of ownership will either be ex-crickers with financial backers or business chiefs with ex-crickets heading their operations.

President, CI (Cricket India): The 16 owners/team presidents (have to be Ex-Cricketers with administrative experience) will nominate a person to represent cricket amongst them as the President for a fixed term of no less than 5 years. There is no election and the nomination of the president has to approved by all the 16 heads. The working president heads the day-to-day functioning. To him, the following VPs/administration heads will report:

1. Finance & Accounts Management dealing with accounts as well as financial deals with sponsors and selling cricketing rights

2. Personnel Management where the coach & associated staff, team members (25 tier-1 players at 3 bands and 15 tier-2 at same band), scout management are handled. Selection can be thru committee or by the VP, Personnel/Coach

3. Infrastructure which will ensure that the required stadiums and their upkeep & curation happens

4. Events & Planning team that will negotiate and plan all the tours of the team both local and abroad.

I might have missed on some details, but the above is the bigger picture. Each of the 16 tier-1 teams will also mimic the same operations so that the vacancies at the top can be filled from the structure below.

Thus, when we run the game as a business and not like the amateur 'working committee meetings' in 5 star getaways will we fulfill the 2 ambitions: make each rupee of cricket revenue count & ensure that cricket operations is treated with business acumen

I believe firstly we should not confuse between sport and entertainment.
Commercial bollywood films are viewed primarily for entertainment. An India-Pakistan match for example, although it is entertaining, it is more a question of national pride and representation. A dull test draw is ok as long as we win the series. It is the same with other sport. National sport has more to do pride than entertainment.
So cricket can only face competition from other sport, not from the entertainment industry.

Firstly, a primary reason why cricket is so popular in india is because our cricket team is world-class. Its because it has provided great representatives of the country in Sachin, Kapil, Sunny and the like. They have a huge individual fan following.

Look at hockey. After 1983, its popularity has dwindled a lot. thats partly because the team is not performing as it used to. It has not produced any great exponants of the game from India (only Dhanraj Pillay is famous). Its the same with other sports as well.

Recently Tennis has caught up in India, and only because of Sania Mirza. We have started following tennis, not because of a loss of interest in cricket, but to follow her exploits.

What I am trying to say is that the only way cricket can face extinction in India is when our football team for example start doing very well...and if our cricket team are underperforming.

The best example here is England. This Ashes has received such a hype in a country where cricket is not at all popular because the team is performing so well, it has been a source of national pride. Not just because the ashes have been so entertaining.

In the long run, there is so much of competition for youth to get into cricket that there will always be talent to carry it forward. i do not think we will ever underperform to that level.

So Cricket is certainly here to stay...there is no question of decrease in popularity...let alone extinction.

I believe one of the way to preserve cricket in India is to instill a bit of pride and tradition into the cricketing public. No matter how developed and fast the society is in England and Australia, their traditional cricketing values e.g Lords, The Boxing Day Test Match in MCG are something that poeple have respected and enjoyed and took as a part of their yearly calender. I live in North America and we have Hockey Hall of Fames and the superbowls and thanksgiving weekend games that are largely popular. On the other hand all the BCCI can come up with is a set of meaningless One Day Internationals scattered in different parts of the country. They do not even have a proper planned international schedule like other nations. India play their matches at whatever time of the year that the BCCI can find and sometimes we do not even know the venue until one week before the matches. What the BCCI needs is an organised schedule which will make the viewers put cricket in their yearly calenders.

Amit,
Your remarks are on the money! Some of the changes you have predicted are already happening. I have watched Test matches in half filled venues with lukewarm spectator interest. I think the key to the positive evolution of Indian cricket is a stripped down beureaucracy that fosters a meritocracy. I think Tests will be around for there are enough of us that reminisce about the days of Lala and Bradman [not having seen either play]. ODIs may evolve to a even shorter / faster game. It's all going to be about viewership and television dollars.

The commercialisation of cricket has actually spoiled the game - which will ultimately kill the game in this country. The crowds who go to watch it live know very little about the game and go there to have fun. Those who watch it on TV are prevented from seeing the finer points of the game Telecasters like Doordarshan show only 4 balls in an over. When a batsman is out they are impatient to plug in Ads and have no patience to show the complete replay.Distractions like betting with SMS on mobiles further distracts the viewers.

All in all, this commercialisation is going to soon kill the GOOSE which lays the GOLDEN EGG. This is the real danger to Indian cricket.

I think the essay is very well written with its liberal use of economic philosophy. The hypothesis drawn on the amount of people declining from cities is based on the assumption that the cities don't absorb any new people but since rich cities have more job opportunities, a healthy amount of people migrate with the old "town" mentality of enjoying cricket. and these people would be the new generation of cricketers from cities. just my 2 cents

Gaurav

The interest for cricket will always remain as long as those plying the game display their passion for the game. This can be clearly seen in the decline in crickets popularity in the West Indies where there are no more players(besides Lara) who have the tremendous skill and ability of Greenidge, Haynes, Richards, Garner, Marshall and all the other glorious players from the Caribbean. The passion displayed in India primarily stems from the success of imaginative players such as Sachin, Dravid, Sehwag, Dhoni and the like and as long as there are players of their ilk representing the national team cricket will always be a popular sport in the land. This may be against what is a cliche in cricket where many say that nobody is above the game - the truth is that the individuals who play the game makes the game what it is..therefore cricket will deservedly do well in india as long as those who play the game display their love for the sport with their acheivemnts on the field.

Looking at the title of discussion, i was curious to see what is the "IMMEDIATE" threat to indian cricket.... did not find any.

You think sports like Indian-Cricket will die down? Neither of us may be there to check this!!!
Common yaar... you should have choosen something else to die down, not indian-cricket !

I just do not agree that cricket will die down in India, but, i support that it will be reformed and reshaped. Who knows in a more reshaped form, the viewership will increase?
Further, there are just too less icc test playing nations at the present time... that will increase for sure in the future... Cricket has not even come to a stage where it is played globally? Many parts in the world people do not know how to pronounce the word "cricket" (read Bhuvan in lagaan!, to support the bollywood!)

Cricket will get reformed and we may not like the change. But, then we will be old and the young generation may like it !!

Just like drama's on stage gave rise to motion pictures!
But, my grandpa dosen't like the pictures, only drama !
And I: --------- already do not like this supersub business !

But, to comment on another comment which appeared here.... TV has definetely killed radio. if you make a poll as to how many people have listened to radio in the last one week, i am sure the numbers will tell you. Things which i used to watch on TV, now i am watching on my pc and most of the people now on mobiles !!
That is why i believe that cricket will be reformed....

But, yes, The BIG question is probably, how to save test cricket?

As an Indian fan I have to say the telecast and presentation by DD is an absolute nightmare for someone who tunes in to see cricket. The whole farce of a DD broadcast is topped only by its very own incompetent [among other unmentionable things!]commentary team. You'll have to pay me plenty if I'm to sit through torture by the likes of Arun Lal,Maninder Singh, L.Sivaramakrishnan, Charu Sharma,Mohinder Amarnath and Srikanth.. Thanks but no thanks, I was busy watching Pakistan vs England to even care about what happened in Chennai. Will someone start a blog on this issue?

Dear Sir,
Good Day.

Sorry, to say, but i will not agree to your statement as i feel that as long as you have players like sachin cricket will be present in the soul of every indian. For the people who live outside indian its always a proud statement to mention that SACHIN TENDULKAR is an Indian.

Amit,
Although i don't agree with your theory, I would say that change is the only certainty. Who would have thought about sucess of one day cricket few decades back? There are always going to be changes in a way any game is being played. As India develops, there would be more money into game of Cricket, and this would attract more young people to consider professional cricket as a viable career option. I agree as India grows there would be more options for entertainment, but at the same time there would be more people who could afford to take Cricket as a viable career option.

Amit, do you remember the Indian political party, BJP's, Advani pushing for re-writing the Indian constitution a few year ago and the fierce opposition it met with?
It symbolizes the story of opposition to change.

Too much cricket or commercialization will not kill cricket in the region.
Baseball in the US can be a good example. During the season, each team plays 6-7 days a week, 162 or more games a season.
There are 29 such teams and each team has a loyal following. If we combine all games by all teams, there are roughly 2400 games each 6 month season!
Most stadiums are fully occupied during the 3-4 hour games, most tickets ranging in the 12-30 US Dollar range and a lot of big teams have their own TV channels.

The need is for meticulous planning and the channeling of the resources in the right places.
Some areas that need immidiate funding:
1. Cricket grounds - Apart from a few, most grounds are just not geared to handle the crowd and the aura.
2. Training facilities.
3. Domestic criket: Television Broadcasting, increased prize money and promotion.
The rivalry between domestic teams can be promoted for people to relate to and enjoy a Bombay Vs. Delhi game.
This will slowly solve the problem of over-pouring of crowd into the stadiums as the fans would be distributed between domestic and international games.

Also, all teams cannot play with the same strength. There needs to be a grading of leagues where team can compete against their likes and gun for the next higher league.
The Asia-Ocenia rouds of Tennis Davis cup and the different World Cup qualifiers can be an example.

Coming back to the BJP comment, if the board is reformed into a "For Profit" organization, issue public shares, have a board that would work for maximizing profit and be guided by a set of basic "sporting" principles, most of the evils that plague Indian cricket will go away.

The functions of the Indian cricket board can be broadly classified into these groups and more:

1. Choosing the best Indian team for International contests and its functioning.
2. Organizing domestic and International competitions.
3. Promoting cricket nationally, unearthing talent.
4. Dealing with other National Cricket boards.
5. Creation and maintainence of cricket facilities nationally.
6. Managing the above financially.

Each of these functions are independent of each other.
The need is to have a loosely coupled system with independent teams in the board that manages these functions without friction.

Some of these are functions cost centers while most can generate their own profits given the popularity of the sport in the country.

Each of the positions should be held by professionals instead of funny politicians.

Cricket can be a good candidate for the change which can then spread to other sports in the country.

Who takes the first step?

Hi Amit
I think you have iver simplified the problem here.
Cricket enjoys a tremendous following in our nation - and the only comparison I can think of here is the sort of relationship that Brazil has with football. Cricket has made such an imprint on our national psyche - and I believe that now there is such a thing, it will take more than spiralling opportunity costs to remove that from this pedestal.
Let me explain. In the recently concluded Bangalore one-dayer, Rs. 200 tickets, were selling for Rs. 1500. Pubs throughout the city had screens beaming live telecast. And it is not as if Bangalore is a sleepy little small town where the junta can afford eight hours of cricket viewing. The opportunity costs are already high. I can't vouch for this, but even the match held in that other beehive of IT activity - Hyderabad, tickets seemed to have been sold out. It is a fact that test cricket in India is witnessing never-before seen crowds and increased TV viewership. All, mind you, in these post-liberalization years! The fact that more of India's cricketers are coming from smaller towns cannot be used to arrive at the conclusion that you arrive at.

Brazil, despite the huge strides that it has made in opening itself up, is still as addicted to football as ever! I believe that the notion of a "national psyche" is a very real thing and cricket is a core component - even more so than Bollywood which does not capture the imagination of the entire nation in the manner that cricket does. Obviously therefore, cricketing revenues are never going to decrease. At best, it might peak at some point and reach a plateau.

And if reforms are going to happen in cricket, reforms have to happen to the BCCI. And this will not happen exclusively through market forces acting from outside. Instead, I believe that it will happen through a slow evolutionary process - forced by several pressures, one among which may be the market. BCCI cannot be seen as an isolated entity. It is a part of our national, "public sector" machinery; and can be scarse expected to behave out of character. When our state and central administrative organs embrace proffessionalism, when our public sector realizes the need to stay true to their core constituency, the BCCI too will reflect such change.

Interesing hypothesis.I am afraid inspite of all our liberalisation, we are still a zillion years away from acheiving the kind of prosperity in small towns and villages that is similar to the west.
Still,anybody who has visited a so called village in England with all its prosperity knows that it is the local pub which is the centre of all the activity. i.e there are not that many avenues to spend money.
The point I want to make is that Cricket is today more popular in England than at any time in the last 10 years.This is inspite doing well in other sports, winning medals in Olympics and of of coursr footy being their national game. This popularity has been acheived cecause they are playing well and that's what counts.
I think globalization and money will help develop other sports. Cricket's popularity will drop but will still remain the strongest force.
A lot of professionals who live in USA and Canada, still spend the entire night watching and go to work the next day. It is also no secret that they make a lot more money than we do here.
That tells me if you love cricket-- you will always find time and ignore everything else.The health of cricket in this country FOR A GENERaTION is fine
bHANU

I think with globalization the demand for Cricket will decrease over time in India and Pakistan but at the same time the demand will increase in North America. I heard in CNBC World of how Cricket already is showing a slight decline in ratings and commercial revenue from the previous years in India. In India and Pakistan the upper class family teens are already showing a greater demand for English soccer then Cricket. I believe this trend will continue to develop as more people find substitutes in South Asia. One also has to understand the true sense of globalization. In globalization there are exchanges of cultures and the more popular cultures become worldwide in application. As Soccer is truly the most popular sport in the world, I see it to be the biggest threat to Cricket in South Asia. And Yes, I believe that Twenty20 is the best way to counter against Soccer in the long run. In the long run, demand for Cricket will decline as more people in South Asia will be attracted to Cricket's susbstitues like Soccer and other sports. On the other side, globalization will also lead to a higher demand for Criket in USA and Canada from overseas for the South Asian communities.

I have to agree with you Amit.

If not cricket what else will work in india, Amit?
football- we are at the bottom.
hockey- not only we, it seems whole world has forgoten the game.
Tennis-At the best we produce one player of world class per generation.
Track and field- not more than few hundreds go and watch.
As far as crowd we are known as noisiest and deafening crowd. Every visiting team acknowledges this and rejoices too.
Get me a ticket for test or odi at any of these venues such as mumbai,chennai or banglore. Can you without some recommendation or standing in the long Q?
cRICKET may come extinct if only when we indians suddenly become workoholics in order realize the dream of making INDIA a economic superpower!

Interesting views. I play cricket here in Chicago, USA in a league of about 50 odd teams. And this is just among 3 states. I'm sure that there are several leagues in the US. My point is inspite of having a variety of options in sports for entertainment (american football, baseball, basketball..) there are lot of people who prefer cricket. It will take something drastic to divert the attention that cricket gets to any other form of entertainment

Hi Amit,

I don't agree with you on a few things...
First, I think sports (any kind) do not just have only entertainment value there is more associated to it. Not just national pride but there is a sense of "real" achievement or failure that is why match fixing could have killed it. So as far as cricket dying because of other forms of entertainment is a very rare possibility.
There is still audience for hard fought test matches. It is the competition that will keep the sport going not one-sided dominance. As long as there good performers in the game and the team is winning there will be following. Cricket will die when we do not have a world class team anymore and all we have is the BCCI.
But yes with the changing times and fast moving lives the format of cricket will change too. I am not a fan of 20-20 maybe because I have grown up with 50-50. It might catch on if it clicks with the next generation of viewers. I don’t know what the BCCI can do or maybe will do nothing. Maybe you are right when the default status of cricket being the money vomiting monster changes then the BCCI will spin into action. But one thing that is surely needed is good commentary for matches!!!! With a few exceptions commentary is abysmal (just for the record I am a fan of Harsha’s commentary and columns). Then it will make my staying up all night to watch the match much more worth while.
Maybe with so much globalization we will have podcast for cricket!!!!!!!

Hi Amit,

I don't agree with your hypothesis for one simple reason:
At the moment India is easily the most lucrative market for cricket because of it's cricket mad public (it doesn't hurt that we are the largest cricket playing nation in the world either). This trend doesn't look like it's in any danger of changing soon. Therefore if cricket in India loses its shine, it will be an indication that cricket on a world wide scale will be on the decline.
This will in turn mean that YOU will be out of a job, this website will not exist in its present form and most importantly, we will not be debating this at all because as you pointed out, we will all have better things to do.

So take it easy Amit - either way it will all work out.

Stephen

So, Amit, what you're really saying is that the biggest threat to Indian cricket is the BCCI? I agree. If BCCI got its act together, erosion of cricket viewership and interest can be stemmed for a really long time (albeit, as you mention, probably not forever). BCCI is acting like a damn monopoly (think IBM of the former days) and will pay the price for its inaction, arrogance and thorough incompetence. "We learn from history that we do not learn from history." (The name of the source evades me at this point.)

Pratik
http://yorker.wordpress.com

Just as an aside:

I see there are many, many comments/ articles about Indian cricket in Cricinfo. Was this originally an Indian cricket web site ?

I believe a much of the discussion is triggered by this year 2005 appearing to be a seminal moment in Indian cricket. Well it may be, but boy do we discuss it a lot!

The recent Seminal moments to me are:
1971 Ind vs WI
1971 Ind vs Eng
1983 WC Final
2001 Ind vs Aus
2003 WC Final
2003 Ind vs Aus
2004 Ind vs Pak

In that context granted having Dravid-Chappell combine is exciting but does it warrent so much discussion?

The long term future of football is under threat in the UK if one has to look at things under the microscope which we are not. As above mentioned football and cricket are not similar so its foolish to compare. The passion is different for both, for example the younger kids who are born after 90 or so think test cricket is boring and think ODI cricket is the only way of things.

There is a grain of truth in Amit's article. Whatever happens, I don't think cricket will stop being in India's top 10 passions, but it will certainly slide down the rankings. Yes, cricket is top dog in Australia, but so is rugby, tennis and every other sport. Sport plays a very important role in the upbringing and daily life of Australians (and the English)every kid plays something, facilities don't hurt; therefore some sport will always remain at the forefront; and it helps that these countries are internationally top class in a number of them. In contrast, India is not generically a sporting nation-loads of kids don't play anything; other than cricket any other sport is niche, we are not really on the world stage (and no, the occassional Sania Mirza does not count). Why is this critical - sport can get relegated faster than you think.... and the comparison with Oz/Eng is apples vs eucalyptus trees

I disagree with the viewpoint - Indian cities (including Calcutta) draw the biggest crowds for most cricket games. There are things that go beyond the attractions of global fads. Cricket has found its adopted home in India, and it is a part of every Indian's psyche today. Indians like me, who live abroad, follow Indian cricket with the same zeal that we used to while in India. While the format of the game will change over time, I cannot imagine that the game itself will die away. Shorter movies from Hollywood did not eliminate Bollywood. If anything, it has made Bollywood more popular around the world. I believe in the timeless lure of a game that involves skill, strategy and physical strength all at the same time. The only way for cricket (and anything for that matter) to overcome globalization is to market itself seriously outside of current ICC countries. If we could sell bhangra music, we can sell 20/20 too. While we evaluate the future of cricket, we have to remember that more than 1.4B people in south asia are mad about this game. Save soccer, no other game can match cricket's passion.

I disagree, dont have any other sports that we are even mediocre at. Cricket is here to stay

I dont find any threats to the Indian cricket team as far as a debate on this dou is concerned . Its just a matter of one player being or not being in the team. As far as the coaches are conserned one coach may be marginally superior than the other, but the final intentions are to get the best out of its players, so far Dravid has proved his efficiency in captaincy skill and his game skills . If Ganguly proves to be a good player in domestic cricket he can surely find a place in the team , but surely not on his past glories..

Hi Amit,
I live here in australia and what you are saying happens here every season. Cricket officals don't think of cricket as a sport and don't consider success for the game at the highest level as an indicator for the success of the game. The sucess of the game for everyone here is when people involment in the sport is increased like, more people playing in cricket club and infusing young kids into the system so that their talents can be developed. Cricket here has to compete with other summer sports like tennis escially since the aussie open is in January which is a peak cricket season for everyone and to a lesser extent with winter sports like rugby,AFL and soccer. Qualification for the soccer WC means another probelem for the cricket officals. Succes of the national team is a really big factor in making the game big as it motivates every on to start playing again but surely the job is not finshed there. Some of the ppl here including me were getting bored of seeing Aus. kill other cricketing nations with ease but all that has changes since the ashes and it has done more good for the game here than bad as millions watched the ashes on the tele deep into the night. An indicator for the cricket craze here (which is being destroyed by a spineless windies) is that all equipment suppliers here are out of stock of cricket equpiment and are importing huge amounts to make up for the demand. Also there is a 700% increase in the number of ppl siging up to play cricket. Now all cricket needs in india is some other sports to start to come up like tennis(sania),F1(possiblity),soccer, hockey(Hockey league) to help get cricket and its followers back on line. But even in the most disastrous conditions i can't see cricket needing to struggle for suvival there some time so even though the intrest is on decline i think india needs to get more kids into the game and not just gulli cricket....

Absolutely No ...
Nothing can change cricket in India ,, as simple as that .People will continue watching Indian and world circket. In INDIA even a filthy rich man or a man completely submerged in Debt both watch the Cricket and go to sleep with joy or tears in their eyes depending upon the Team India's performance irrespective of the opponent.

Circket's is going to stay ,, at least till the our generation

yeah it's indeed an interesting hypothesis.but i disagree that cricket viewership will decline...The game is so modernised and i don't think so this cricket mad country will slowly lose their interests in following this remarkable game..People these days watch even international cricket with great deal of enthusiasm..I do remeber lots of people watching the recently concluded ashes series.But still BCCI should be more professional and if Good players are tapped and given right oppurtunities to excel, india will definitely fare much better and in the long run too will perform well

I agree with your views amit. Probably one suggested remedy could be to popularize the internal tournaments like ranji duleep and many more, introducing changes in rules and regulations from time to time - so to keep the larger masses (that belong to those smaller cities and towns) attracted to the game that has given India so much. I guess we need to have more cricket academies and schools where children learn and play cricket not just for being a one-day player but the test version too. Look at those Australian academies, every state/ county or whatever has a school or an academy and every year they have an equal number of budding stars coming up. With the way things are moving, i think we might land up in a situation similar to the West Indies... where people have taken to other things not because of a decline in cricket, but coz of western influence. For that matter, i remember a great English player once said, "there's more to life than just cricket" - but with their effective measures and strategies, the English Cricket Board has managed to 'fight back' and they have shown a considerable improvement over the past 2 yrs or so. Let's not limit this game just to one-dayers or 6-a-siders, lets learn to love cricket and not just watch it!
good wishes - raj

Amit,
While your hypothesis appears to be on correct lines, you haven't quite factored in our population and expanse.As it is Cricket does not have the following in India of the magnitude found in the UK.Cricket is available on free to air TV and low cost stellite otions so people watch.But nearly 13% of all UK population was watching the closing stages of the Oval Test.I doubt if Cricket is so popular in India.
and Cricket will have to reach the Villages and that will have to be through free to Air TV,with commentary in fifty or more languages.
As of today, in a state the size of France and with a population more than the UK there is no Ranji Team and Gujarat has three Ranji teams.Consequently Patna gets no one day or test matches.
But Patna will have a full house when delhi's Cricket appetite is satiated and when patna has has had its fill, Gorakhpur will have Test matches and i can assure you there will be more people watching than they do in Kandy or Faisalabad.
Sanjeeb Kumar

Very interesting analysis, but I wouldn't entirely agree with that. Australia and UK (or maybe only England) - 2 developed, cricket playing nations - what is your take on them? Cricket has very much prevailed there, in pretty much all forms. People plan their vacations according to the series dates. I would say as and when some form of game loses its charm, BCCI, which's been the synonymous with commercialization, atleast in India, will show the way. Pakistan isn't as well developed as India. But I believe the interest in cricket is comparitively lower. I guess its not only the development phases of the nation that dictates the changes in mindsets of people when it comes to choices of entertainment but it has got to do with other reasons too, for instance it might be religious reasons in Pakistan or whatever political reasons in Zimbabwe (I hate to speculate but my intent is just to cite an example). My final say is, even in a long run, BCCI will keep Indian cricket alive as long as somebody can bat and somebody can bowl and they find some people to field. So, cricket prevails.

Cricket, as with anything else, has to evolve to survive. Test matches were good then, one-dayers are popular now and 20-20 may be the way to go soon. Is that bad? I am not sure. It is true that, as desperate as I am to follow everything that happens in the Team Indian world, it is difficult to keep track on a day-in day-out basis. I wouldn't mind watching a competitive game in 4 hours. That will be every bit as exciting and I can be quite committed to follow the whole deal. I do that now with select games of american football, baseball, basket-ball and tennis, to name a few sports. Of course, I do that with cricket too and will continue to, but 8 hours is truly a lot of time, leave alone 5 days.

It is all going to come down to what populace as a whole demands - if the revenue comes from people watching the games on TV and if people demand crisp entertainment, then the game has to evolve to provide that. Else the game will die, if something that can provide those alternatives comes about. Chappell and co. are aiming to bring in a flexibility for Team India to be effective. Cricket administartors have to bring in flexibility to the sport, for the sport to be effective. BCCI, ICC whatever. Today is ok. The future will be intreresting - are even one-dayers starting to drag? Is 20-20 the way to go? Are there other possible innovations, without compromising the game's beauty?

Well written out thoughts Amit. However, I would not either agree or disagree with it completely. What you have written has surely has a point, at the same time it does not really cover whole gamut of other forces that are going to decide the future of viewership of Cricket in India. There are two points that need to be seen closely in coming days, the most imortant being "HOW WELL TEAM INDIA PERFORMS". We in India really dont have much choices as far as sports go...at least in the case of following a particular sport. I am confidednt that if India remain in top 3 cricket teams in both forms of game, the viewership and popularity will never decrease....at least the corporate world will never allow it to decrease...They are bound to put in hordes of $$$$ in cricket.
Another influencing factor would be how well we perform in sports other than cricket...
But next few years are interesting times....

Yes i think its time for football to take over. With Billion ppl in population, who doubts that if there is a genuine talent search, we can have best teams for Football, Hockey, Rugby, Footy and what not, in the world.

Worthy points to note, indeed.

Just follow this train of thought: ICC needs India more and more to keep cricket viable to all. India continues as the commercial superpower of cricket. Which leads to imbalanced development elsewhere - no other country has the wherewithall. Cricket loses its competitiveness and glamour. Cricket loses India. World loses cricket!

Excellent point Amit. For ICC to thrive they need India to do well. For BCCI to thrive, they need cricket to do well in other countries! What an equation!

In my opinion, BCCI must understand the basic charm of cricket and preserve its unique appeal over other sports, if cricket were to thrive here. I'll do a separate post on that.

Interesting hypothesis, but not one I agree with. Indian Cinema (and PLEASE dont insult the worlds most vibrant film industry by calling it Bollywood!) and Indian Cricket will continue to remain top of the heap for the one simple reason - they have the 'first mover' advantage. It doesnt matter how many Olympic medals the Indian contingent may (or may not) win - it doenst matter if we host an F1 race - and it doesnt matter even if we manage to win the Soccer World Cup - the first mover advantage will ever ensure that Cricket remains the favorite Indian sport. Just as Indian Cinema will remain tops in entertainment, no matter how many satelite channels flood the idiot box.

For all you cricket haters who 'cant understand what the fuss is all about' - give it up...coz you never will!

it's quite an interesting hypothesis. on the philosophical level, well, every thing is here to die, one cannot just help it. but on more practical level, indian cricket hasn't yet realised its true potential, it's just half way on the curve and it still has lots of time to get to the zenith, may be two generations away, a very pesimestic estimate, though.

saying this i don't disagree with the observation that bcci must be reformed. the biggest help that bcci can do to indian cricket is to concentrate on administrative headaches and let the selectors do their job. in the broad interests of the game it must not poke its nose on who is in (the team) and who is out. if someone is a great player, fine, it shouldn't mean that he is indispensable, the way the big fishes are chanting ganguly's name is not a good indication of what they think of players' worth. in this competitive world non performers dosen't find a place.in this regard bcci must emulate cricket australia. let them limit thier nasty politics to the chairman's room.

well coming back to the point if indian cricket can survive, charls darwin said it loooong ago; it's not the strongest of the species that survives, neither the most intelligent, rather the one which is more reactive to changes, indian cinema (good gods, it's enough of following western names) has done it and it is surveving and hockey couln't, it is gone to docks, so the writing on the wall is clear..... only if mr ganguly can understand it!!

If cricket is to be replaced in the mind of the Indian cricket fan, WHAT is going to replace it? If I for one had more options by way of having more money, guess what? I would go to each and every match that India played, travel to every ground in every country and enjoy it right there. The reason India enjoys cricket is not only because it is available in big doses right now, but it is the ONLY sport in which India excels over a long period of time. Each time India walks out to play a cricket match, we expect to win. That's a great feeling that is not really duplicated in other sports in India.

Tell me when there's a real alternative and I will debate your other points.

Why cricket is so popular in India? Because it is one game where Indians have an international achievement in a team game. While individual outstanding contributors like Sachin have enjoyed excellent popularity and financial support. If we look at the hockey which was a popular sport has now lost its popularity because of continuous losses. If similarly India keeps losing the matches, public will lose interest. Indians want some thing that would make them proud at the international level. At the moment it is only cricket.
By and large the credit goes to Kapil and his men who conquered the world cup (in 1983) and showed to the world by good team work how the weakest rated team can conquer the strongest team in the world.
I am not a Kapildev's fan but in my opinion he deserves the recognition for revolutionising the one day cricket internationally, unfortunately he is born in India and had to end up with the tears in front the TV crew. If he was born in Australia or England he would have become a legend!

I think this hypothesis is fairly correct. I live in Canada and the peple here say cricket is the most boring sport as it takes so much time. If we see, India is slowly going the western way. The life in India is getting faster. If cricket needs to stay popular it needs to change the way it is played.

Kiran More, the chairman of selectors, added that Zaheer Khan missed out because Ganguly would provide a bowling option.
Was wondering if anything could be more ludicrous than this.

The claim that sports viewership goes down as incomes rise is not a very well founded one. At least it's not one that can be made in the manner it's been made here. You have to look at higher order moments of the income distribution, rather than only the mean to have any hope of rigorously looking at an effect like that. You would also have to look at factors other than income, and ask more generally as to what actually constitutes "social status", not as an exogenous object, but as some kind of "equilibrium" notion.

The claim that reduced profits would make the BCCI more "efficient" is also not a very rigorous one. Competition in the market place is not a panacea to all ills. If that were so, competition in the market place would have resulted in the disappearance of discrimination along, say, gender or race lines. The point is that incentives to action, and social outcomes as a result of those actions, are determined not just by the singular institutuion of the market, but by a myriad of other mechanisms and institutuions.

I think cricket in india is like people in india. It will never have an end.I think You are thinking too much.
Please dont spread such rumours.
Thank You.
Rahul

It is not necessary that the cricket viewership is going to go down to a neglible level due to modernisation/liberlisation of our country. Consider USA as an example. Their population is less when compared to that of India, but all of the big leagues NBA, NFL, NHL are well attented. It is just a matter of interest as to what one wants to do. With the advent of 20-20 cricket, nobody needs to sit through a match for an entire day. Cricket would also be played more professionally , when the players realise that the crowd is not going to come irrespective of the way they play (As it is now).
Thanks.
Mahesh

Why is Ganguly back in the Indian Team? How much did his dad pay the selection committee this time to take him in the Team? It is precisely because of events like this the young talented players do not get a chance to play. Where is the strength in the voices of Gavasker, Shastri and More? At this rate the efforts that have been put in by the team and Chappell will be wasted and we will remain just but a shadow of what we are capable of as a team (Did I mention, forget winning the World Cup in 2007) Any comments?

Thanks
Dharmendra
An angry cricket fan

well the title of this discussion "The biggest threat to Indian cricket", isnt appropriate anymore.

Well i dopt think their is any threat to India cricket, whether in form of of any other cricket playing nation, or any person, or any group of people. Indian cricket is on sky high, which i hope should never reach ground, if it do then it should happpen after 2007 world cup.

only there is a threat to bcci rite that is, - AUSTRALIA+NEWZELAND, i,e who will host 2011, world cup. Well i think this time australia might edge it as the world cup which in 1996 which was jointly hosted by asian teams(india,sri lanka & pakistan) was not well organized. We saw some bottles being thrown on groiund during Indo-Lanka match that too in semi final.

but yeah India do have a oppurtunity to host comman welth games which are in 2009, but bcci got to impress icc this time because they cant wait till 2009 as the host of 2011 world cup has to be decided before. So hope they win this as they are also most richest board amongst all. So just hope,

Thats the only threat to Indian Cricket what i feel.

Popularity of Cricket can never come down in India. Though Test Cricket has become a low key now and one day cricket has become popular the exitment will never go.
Twenty20 can become popular. If india performs badly one gud performance will rekindle the heart of the fans

Sankaran

I entirely agree with Amit. It is an intelligent introspection on future of cricket in general. I am a cricket fan and would like to continue to follow and watch both versions of the game with that same interest as I used to have when I was a child. In North America where I belong, cricket is a game hardly talked about. We wish that ICC takes more positive steps to spread the shorter version of this game and make it popular. Pls do not try to promote test matches as these will be total flop. Keep in mind that for many people from S.Asia, especially people from India, cricket is a passion. So we pray and hope that icons like talented Sachin, Dravid and Sourav, keep the Indian flag flying high with the help of brilliant young ones like Sehwag, Kaif, Yuvraj, Dhoni, Irfan, RP, Gautam, Bhajji. As an Indian I feel sad when any discussion comes up about any controversy on the coach. Let us hope that good sense prevails and cricket moves forward.

Nov 26, 2005

The popularity of cricket in India is dependent on its popularity in the rest of the world. Most people follow cricket because of nationalism and their desire to see the Indian team bring glory to the country through its achievements on the field.

However, if cricket's popularity slowly declines in the rest of the world, the "glory" derived from wins will diminish. After all, if India thrashes Australia in a test series in 2012, and no one in Australia cares or follows the series, what glory is really achieved? Thus, while cricket is very popular in India and the current health of the sport is fine, the passion for cricket in India may diminish in the future due to external rather than internal causes.