Olympic Revamp: The Case for Removing Tennis and Incorporating Cricket

When it comes to the Olympic Games, there are always discussions about how to streamline the event and ensure it remains relevant and engaging. One intriguing question that often arises is what sport would you remove from the Olympics? This essay explores this concept by examining the removal of tennis, golf, and association football, and arguing for the inclusion of cricket as a more fitting replacement.

Removing Sports from the Olympics

The decision to remove a sport from the Olympics hinges on several factors, including its widespread popularity, the prestige of the Olympic title, and its ability to draw attention to the Games. Consider the following sports that are currently not part of the Olympics:

Rubik's Cube: While a fascinating mind game, it doesn't generate the kind of revenue from ticket sales that the Olympic organizers are looking for. Aircraft Throwing: A niche sport that may not appeal to a broad audience. Poly-stringing: Another sport that appears to be less about widespread appeal and more about niche interest.

When evaluating which of the three sports—tennis, golf, or association football—to remove, it is essential to consider which sport has less prominence in the global sports landscape and which one can best benefit from the prestige of an Olympic title.

Revisiting Tennis, Golf, and Association Football

My opinion is that the sports where the Olympic title is not one of the most prestigious should not be in the Olympics. The Olympics provide a unique platform to draw attention to sports that may not receive the same level of media coverage. Integrating highly publicized sports can detract from this value. As a result, I believe the sport to be dropped should be tennis, golf, or association football. If forced to choose, I would select tennis for its lesser prominence in the global sports hierarchy compared to these other sports.

Cricket: A Promising Sport for Olympic Inclusion

Cricket, a sport deeply rooted in British culture, is also the second most watched sport globally, with over 2.5 billion fans. Cricket has the potential to significantly enhance the global appeal of the Olympics. The highest participation sport globally that is not already in the Olympics is cricket, with an estimated 220 million players worldwide. Cricket is already recognized as one of the top ten world sports, and an Olympic title would be extremely prestigious.

Cricket has a rich history in the Olympics, having been part of the Games in 1900. However, it was removed due to the growth of other sports. Including cricket would not only boost participation but also bring significant attention to the Olympics, especially in regions like South Asia and the Indian subcontinent, where cricket is already a paralyzing sport.

The Case Against Golf and Tennis

Golf, although popular, is already well-established and well-regarded in the sports world. Its inclusion in the 2009 Olympics might not have been the most strategic decision, as it was already a widely recognized and successful sport before the Olympics. Adding golf could be seen as a cash-grab by the IOC, which is not in line with the spirit of the Olympics.

Tennis faces similar criticisms. It already has a prestigious Grand Slam circuit, and the Olympic title might not significantly elevate the status of the sport. Moreover, its alignment with the French-hosted games could be seen as a weak argument for its inclusion.

Conclusion

The Olympics should strive to balance the representation of widespread and culturally significant sports while ensuring the event remains relevant and engaging. By removing tennis or golf and incorporating cricket, the Olympics can tap into a broader audience, enhance its global appeal, and provide a platform for sports that truly deserve recognition. Cricket, with its massive following and rich cultural significance, stands as a strong candidate for Olympic inclusion.