• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Crowds

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
Football's a global sport though. Even I watched all of the football world cup games despite the fact that I don't follow any team (club/nation).
 

Borges

International Regular
To be honest, if you're going by that then it's been matched and surpassed in the past by most England football matches in major tournaments.
Should we reduce everything to a zero-sum game, a rat race? If I become very rich, say become a billionaire, should I mourn because my neighbour has become richer than me? If the average TV viewership for test matches in India is now about 7.5 million, about five times what it was ten years ago, should I bemoan the imminent death of test cricket? Because even more people watch the IPL? Because the percentage viewership for test cricket is now lower than when it was the only form of the game?

Cricket is not football; it is a game played by just a handful of nations; in many of those nations it is not even the first choice sport. For arguments sake, if cricket were to disappear from the face of this earth, it would be like a flea falling off an elephants back - it wouldn't make the least bit of difference to the vast majority of the sporting world.

So let us celebrate that an unprecedented 68 million people watched a cricket game. Rather than lament that a higher percentage of people had watched a football game. As far as the future of cricket as a sport in concerned, it is absolute numbers that are important - relative percentages with respect to global sports like football are totally irrelevant. A Kiwi cricket fan should be delighted if the average national viewership for cricket went up by, say, 100,000 in the next year. Even if in the same period the average viewership for rugby went up by 200,000.

So about 100 million have TVs
That seems to be about right; agrees with the TAM annual update 2010 http://www.tamindia.com/tamindia/NL_Tam/Overview_Universe update - 2010.pdf
Total households: 223 million
Households with TV: 134 million
Households with Cable/Satelite TV: 103 million
 

Bun

Banned
Should we reduce everything to a zero-sum game, a rat race? If I become very rich, say become a billionaire, should I mourn because my neighbour has become richer than me? If the average TV viewership for test matches in India is now about 7.5 million, about five times what it was ten years ago, should I bemoan the imminent death of test cricket? Because even more people watch the IPL? Because the percentage viewership for test cricket is now lower than when it was the only form of the game?

Cricket is not football; it is a game played by just a handful of nations; in many of those nations it is not even the first choice sport. For arguments sake, if cricket were to disappear from the face of this earth, it would be like a flea falling off an elephants back - it wouldn't make the least bit of difference to the vast majority of the sporting world.

So let us celebrate that an unprecedented 68 million people watched a cricket game. Rather than lament that a higher percentage of people had watched a football game. As far as the future of cricket as a sport in concerned, it is absolute numbers that are important - relative percentages with respect to global sports like football are totally irrelevant. A Kiwi cricket fan should be delighted if the average national viewership for cricket went up by, say, 100,000 in the next year. Even if in the same period the average viewership for rugby went up by 200,000.



That seems to be about right; agrees with the TAM annual update 2010 http://www.tamindia.com/tamindia/NL_Tam/Overview_Universe update - 2010.pdf
Total households: 223 million
Households with TV: 134 million
Households with Cable/Satelite TV: 103 million

A very good post. Except for the highlighted portion. Surely a potential one third of humanity would definitely miss it?
 

Borges

International Regular
A very good post. Except for the highlighted portion. Surely a potential one third of humanity would definitely miss it?
Well, if a potential one third of humanity would definitely miss it it won't fall of the face of the earth. This potential one third of humanity, to my mind are not die-hard, hard core cricket fans. For instance, if India were to do consistently badly in cricket for a decade, but started rising as world power in football, I'm fairly certain that the majority of present Indian cricket cricket fans, urged on by the media, would abandon cricket in favour of football. The number of followers of women's tennis in India explodes overnight when Sania Mirza creates a pitiful ripple. Quite a bit of this great pan-Indian love for cricket, IMHO, is just an expression of assertiveness by a nation with a history of colonial subjugation, now on the verge of being a major global power.

If cricket were to disappear from the face of this earth, it wouldn't happen overnight. It would be a gradual process, almost unnoticed by the non-cricket playing world.
 

quytst0rm

School Boy/Girl Captain
5 % of overall Indian population is not the correct way to measure that, if you count the households that have a television, it will be a lot higher.

According to ITV, India has about only 138 Million homes have Cable & Satellite. and if 68 million watched, that's an amazing feat and I am not sure any other sporting tournament in the world can match that in terms of %.
The 2011 NFL Super Bowl was watched by 111 millions people and there are 114.9 million U.S. Television Homes so the above number still pales in comparison.

Super Bowl packs in record U.S. TV viewer total | Reuters
114.9 Million U.S. Television Homes Estimated for 2009-2010 Season | Nielsen Wire
 

Agent Nationaux

International Coach
The crows were excellent, even in Bangladesh where the home team had been knocked out in the qualifying rounds.

I'am also looking forward to the 2015 WC, where the crowds should be excellent. Nothing beats a crowd in Australia.
 

Adamc

Cricketer Of The Year
Have to invoke the Bradman rule there though. Can't realistically expect to beat the US in a TV-watching contest.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Yes and it was irrelevant because the reason marc quoted those figures was because Sanz said 'no other sport could compare' or something like that
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Always get the feeling that Indians don't like following sport, they just like following India.
Comments like these disgust me. People have no clue about certain things yet they continue to post garbage.
I'm learning the rules. I feel more at home every day. The stadium is like any American stadium: (too-)loud music and ham-fisted promotion. The fans sit quietly until a JumboTron camera finds them, then they go nuts. Look! Everyone's a celebrity!

But there's something missing.

The stands are half-empty. These are two great teams, elite sides, evenly matched, on a beautiful Delhi day, in a city of 14 million people, and most seats are empty. They'll stay that way. It's not just Delhi. When India's not playing, the stadiums are pretty dead. That game has explained itself, all right: Indians aren't as cricket-mad as I thought. There is a surprising lack of street-level buzz. Sure, the televisions are going mad, and the newspapers and radio programs and billboards. The hype machine is kicking at max RPMs. But it seems just that. Hype. A mile wide and an inch deep. The former Indian player's pressbox eulogy makes sense. India has gained an impossible amount in the past 20 years. Has it lost something, too?

I turn to Rahul. "Do Indians still love the actual game of cricket?"

There's a pause.

"It's a delicate sort of question," he says.

Another pause.

"The thing about Indians' love for cricket is, a lot of it is having something to support India at," he says. "A lot of it is celebrity. People in love with [team captain MS] Dhoni instead of the actual sport. It happens all the time. In the past five years, you find that matches not featuring India don't draw crowds. It does seem on some level the love is not for the sport itself but for some of the things it stands for."


Wright Thompson: In Tendulkar country | Specials | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Some more:

The girls can't stop looking at the autograph book, then leaning into each other, then giggling, then looking, then giggling. "I cannot believe you told Virat Kohli that I'm in love with him!" Radhika says.

Vineet laughs.

"I only like Gautam," Radhika says. "I don't like Virat Kohli anymore. I used to like him a lot, but he was with a girl. A nice one."

Dad is still laughing but has that worried-dad look on his face.

"Why not Sehwag?" I ask.

"He's married," Radhika says. "And has two kids."

Vineet looks a bit pale. "I'm not listening," he says.

The girls cover their faces with their hands, tapping their feet, tingling with nervous energy. I feel it. The passion I looked for at the other cricket matches doesn't exist around the sport, but it does in the Royal Gardenia lobby. Indians might not be obsessed with the sport of cricket per se, but they are with the Indian cricket team. They are unhealthy, myopic and without measure or self-control, and that's just when they see their idols in the flesh.

I cannot imagine what it's like when they're actually watching them play.
 

Top