posted Jun 17, 2009

Ho-hum! Okay, I've lived extensively in Europe and the US, so I know a few things about basically every sport you can imagine. There is an almost romantic bend here for Rugby versus baseball, a result of "home-site" advantage. Don't get me wrong: I grew up watching the 7-nations tournament. But anyone who says baseball has relatively no global appeal is painfully uninformed. Baseball is the most popular sport in all of central america and is a major sport in the Koreas and Japan. Many of the best baseball players in fact are not even Americans. Every time I get a glimpse of rugby, I see the usual suspects - Wales, Scotland, England (all part of one country, last time I checked the UN seating arrangements), Australia, New Zealand and Samoa. That having been said, I don't care if baseball makes it or not. Like football, there is plenty of it to be watched in other venues. Also, if you understood the sport, you'd be aware that there are some superb athletes playing it. It depends in some measure on what position you play. And even if some are not Michael Johnson, their hand-eye coordination and reflexes are truly extraordinary

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 17, 2009

I must admit I had a little chuckle at the mainly pro Rugby Sevens/anti Baseball posts. I thought it was the Americans that were the myopic ones who lack a world perspective, not us Brits.

Full 15 a-side Rugby Union (never mind rugby sevens) is miles behind in popularity compared to Baseball. Baseball is the number one spectator sport in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Venezuela. The only countries I can think of where rugby union is the most popular spectator sport is in New Zealand and the pacific islands – hardly global appeal.

All things considered I believe the two sports, which should be included in the Olympics, are Baseball for its long Olympic Tradition and mass appeal. The competition would also be considered the pinnacle international baseball event for the competing national teams. The same cannot be said for Football, Rugby Union, Tennis and Golf.

To counteract giving one spot to an already internationally established sport, I would give the other spot to Roller Sports, this would fit with the Olympics Board’s wishes to include a sport, which appeals to the younger generations.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 17, 2009

I'd personally go for 7's and Squash because I play them, but 7's is probably more highly regarded in its current format and would be like football at the Olympics, a waste of time. Similarly would baseball be considered it's highest level in the Olympics? Well internationally it would be as there is no world competition therefore perhaps it could be included, I think that roller sports is too vague and after watching some of the bmx last year probably would be as pointless as that even therefore chose Squash and Baseball.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 17, 2009

comment by unounos (U13723610)
posted Yesterday

'On what basis is golf athletic? It's played by aging men in their 50s.'

-------------------------------------

So if golf is to be discounted due to its non-athletic nature, then surely...

archery
shooting

...are way less athletic than golf...therefore should be disposed of?!

Looking at the list of Olympic Sports, based on your argument equestrian disciplines should also be omitted.

And for those saying Olympic golf wouldn't be the biggest prize in the sport, should tennis be removed? Boxing, football, sailing also?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 17, 2009

With Jacques Rogge's stance on Doping, I think you can immediately rule Baseball out.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 18, 2009

Personally I'd vote for sevens and sqaush as they're both fast paced and neither rely on the weather to be good so they can be played. Golf is stereotypically known to be boring so I think less people would go to watch it.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 18, 2009

Surely Squash has to be included. If tennis, table tennis and badminton are, then where is the difference?It is as physically demanding if not more than the other three.
Rugby 7's as well, because of the global appeal and the physical fitness involved.
Baseball and Softball, hardly stimulating or athletic.
Golf. Do i need to say any more?
Karate. yes, But lacking fan base.
Roller sports? surely we have enough sports, without putting wheels on them!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 26, 2009

Having played squash I have to admit it is the most boring sport to watch.
Baseball is far more popular around the world than some of the people on here realise. Its downfall will be the high profile accounts of drug taking.
Softball, in both forms, is also played around the world and importantly by both sexes and all ages so has great appeal.
Softball will return to the olympics with 7's as the other entry.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 29, 2009

squash without a doubt.
its a sport which people know relatively little about, yet is one of the most physically demanding sports. if tennis and badminton are deemed worthy of olympic status, i see no reason why squash isn't, especially as it is physically a more demanding game than tennis

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 2, 2009

Definitely squash, it would be the biggest prize in the sport, raise its audience and is one of the most physically demanding sports out there. Plus rugby sevens as it is great to watch and played all around the world

add comment | complain about this comment