Twenty20 for 2020?

There I was reading the paper on the Tube coming back from Lord’s on Tuesday when I turned to an interview with International Olympic Committee president Jacques Rogge.

Jacques Rogge is a bit of a cricket fan and would like to see the sport become part of the Olympics

I was expecting to read the usual pre-2012 talk about ticket allocations, the stadium and, who could forget it, the legacy. But to my surprise the conversation took on the subject of cricket.

It turns out Rogge is a massive cricket fan, having discovered the game on a childhood holiday to Cornwall. Being from that part of the world I could understand the effect, but it prompted thoughts of having cricket in the Olympics in future.

The International Cricket Council has until the end of this month to make a formal application to become a future Olympic sport and, given Rogge’s love of the game, perhaps it has a good chance. Sports fans from Sri Lanka and Pakistan would be excited at the prospect of an unlikely climb up the medal table and Australia and Great Britain (presumably) would be licking their lips at a chance at more Olympic honours.

But with this most flexible but time consuming of sports, which format would it take on and who would be playing for whom?

Twenty20 cricket would be the obvious choice as it is the shortest format and the most capable of fitting an entire tournament into two weeks, unlike the drawn out 50-over World Cup of two months ago. But there have been ramblings of too much T20 which is drawing the crowds away. Tests are too long and ODIs a little stale, so maybe we would look at a new-look Olympic cricket , similar to Rugby Sevens in the Commonwealth Games.

This also brings the argument about which players we would see fighting it out for Olympic medals rather than the npower medallions handed out at Lord’s this week. Olympics usually clash with an English summer, so would dominating Test cricket still be the number one goal for England? And how would they work it around the schedule? Football’s Olympic tournament is hardly the greatest honour in a player’s career, so they make it for developing players. Maybe cricket would follow suit and make the Olympics for amateurs or under-19s.

And then there are the countries. The fact that only a handful of nations excel at cricket is not a problem because all sports are more popular in some nations than others, but the interest is in how the players would be split. Great Britain should not be a problem as Welshman, Scots and Irishman can and have represented England so it would be a similar make-up; but who would Eoin Morgan play for, or Dutch-Australian Dirk Nannes?

Cricket has created its own rules on nationality which may not fit with the ideals of other sports and the Olympic values. Then again we have seen Kenyan-born runners change nation and the decorated Jamaican sprinter Merlene Ottey running for Slovenia.

It is with Ottey’s fellow Jamaicans and other West Indians where this point is so intriguing. The West Indies team are a phenomenon unique to cricket – would a group from different independent nations be allowed to join forces? Or would they be representing their individual islands, which would increase the amount of countries qualifying to take part in the tournament immensely.

There is a lot to think about for Mr Rogge and his team and there are definitely plus points to having cricket in future Olympics. But there may be just too many variables to make this interesting thought a reality.

By James Toseland