Noorderling29

3 hours ago, CCB said:

Don't underestimate the teams of Czech Republic (who won against Germany at the ECh) and especially Ukraine. I think all the teams in this group will have to play at a good level to beat these teams. 

 

Will be a close battle, but in the end I predict  and  to win the quotas.

In the other groups:

 

B:  and , but watch out for  

C:  and  

 

Belgium? They lost four of their six matches at the EuCh, while playing at home. OTOH, they played a great game against Turkey, nearly taking it to 5 sets.

38 minutes ago, Shravan Kumar said:

Yes The TV Rights will become competitive. Right now even though the Olympics has a viewr base in India the rights are not bid for by all big players. If Cricket is added then the rights become very important as there will be no alternative in those two weeks.  Cricket also is more commercially profitable as it has breaks between overs. If you can guarantee the eyes of Indian sports viewers on one network it will be invaluable and will atleast double the current Tv Rights deal.

Thank you, I now see the logic of the comment.

I assume the subcontinent pays for the tv rights right now. Are you suggesting they pay more just because cricket is added?

The fact that Cricket is not popular in parts of the world in itself is no reason to not include it. The same could be said for other sports that are currently included. 

From a Dutch perspective, the introduction of Korfbal would be supported. It fits right in the IOC wish for more mixed events. I wouldn’t watch it myself though.

Sure, so the length of service apparantly is not a decisive factor

1 hour ago, mpjmcevoy said:

If you get cricket in in'28, it vastly increases the chances of India bidding for - and getting - a 36 Olympics - and indeed South Africa getting a 40 Olympics - and if cricket is in 28, 32, 36 and 40, you're never getting rid of it, except possibly in a swap with baseball in those hosts who much favour the baseball.

Baseball was a full medal sport between 1992 and 2008, but IOC had no problem removing it.

I’m not advocating dropping Breaking, I just won’t watch it, even though we apparently have a medal contender

NL defeated Denmark 3-1, but what a terrible match.

The solution would be to drop Breaking, not to include Cricket.

NL lead over Dominican Republic a whopping 0.49 points. More important the 39.9 lead over Canada.

If it’s variety we are looking for, there must be alternatives that are easier to follow than Cricket.

Re: Breaking. I watched the finals of the European Games, and I did not have a clue how the battles were going. 

It’s hard to understand for Cricket lovers how boring and incomprehensible Cricket is to most people. I say this as someone who enjoys Cricket.

Thanks Italy for 12.69 points we gained for the World Ranking, which means we have passed Dominican Republic and are now 9th.

Looking at the draw,, I was convinced that we could get to the semi-final, to then be hammered by the top teams. The GS matches were pretty awful, the QF against Bulgaria was much better. The matches Friday and today seem to suggest that the team is much better than expected. 

As I stated yesterday, baseball is played in schools, cricket is not. There are several Dutch/Antillian players in the Major Leagues, whose results are reported whereas cricketers are unknown. Baseball gets airtime, cricket very little.

NL is much more a baseball than a cricket country. Baseball is played in school and gets significant attention on TV. Cricket gets little attention; even the recent good results only merit perhaps a 45 second item in a sports program. I seriously doubt many people in this country are aware of or even care about the results of the national Cricket team.

Seems very unlikely that European countries outside UK and Ireland would chose cricket over Baseball. Both are minority sports, but Baseball seems the more popular on the continent 

On 8/29/2023 at 10:23 PM, Jinzha said:

So far  has won all games with a convincing 3-0 and now we face  and will probably convincingly lose 0-3. Every game has felt a bit predictable to me, I was hoping we'd face some of the teams close to us in the ranking like ,  or  .

Against France the result was 3 - 1 and we could easily have lost more sets against weak opposition. We were helped enormously by a very favorable draw, compared for instance to Belgium. Partly the result of course of finishing 4th two years ago (while IIRC Belgium failed to qualify for the knock out fase).

by far our best and most stabile match was against the on paper strongest opponent. The semi finale will show if this was the result of our high level, as the TV commentator stated, or, as I suspect, the weakness of Bulgaria who seemed to not cope with the pressure.

‘Friday will tell.

Amen to that…

On 8/21/2023 at 7:07 PM, OlympicsFan said:

I don't understand the outrage. Do we know that the player didn't want it/have a problem with it? Why do people feel the need to feel insulted on behalf of others? If she has a problem with it, she should express it/speak out herself.

Yes, we know, because she released a statement to that effect. 

Germany has a much larger population than France and one might assume much more athletes to monitor. But the French and German budgets are apparantly comparable.

3 hours ago, AsensioWillemsen said:

Does the NOS show field events?

If there’s time left between the races and the irritating conversations with mr. Sedoc.

And the new commentator NOS uses for field events is atrocious. He has no technical knowledge and just spends the whole time spewing platitudes, combined with faux enthousiasm. He is really unlistenable as he was commentating on the Tour de France and earlier short track skating. I usually watch Eurosport, and switch channels (belgian, British and occasionally Dutch) when Eurosport goes to commercials or does one of those cringe level interviews.

8 hours ago, owenp_23 said:

Points Table after Day 2

 

(10-8-6-5...)

 

1. 69

2. 35

3. 25

 

  Hide contents

4. 24 5. 23 t6. 18 t6. 18 8. 14 9. 11 t10. 10 t10. 10 t10. 10 13. 9 t14. 8

t14. 8 t14. 8 t14. 8 t14. 8 19. 7 t20. 6 t20. 6 t20. 6 t23. 5 t23.   5 t23. 5

t23. 5 t23. 5 t28. 4 t28. 4 t30. 3 t30. 3 t32. 2 t32. 2 t32. 2 t32. 2 t32. 2

 

 

It looks like you forgot to award Emma Oosterwegel’s points to the Dutch tally.

36 minutes ago, OlympicsFan said:

Ok, obviously I'll need to make my point even clearer ...

Germany was closer to the top teams (Netherlands/Australia) than last year and obviously times from the finals don't count. Germany only had 2 rides, so obviously it wouldn't make sense to use times from rounds were Germany didn't even compete. You might say that maybe France didn't give their best in the 2nd round and that their time therefore didn't reflect their true strength, but obviously they would have had zero incentive to do so (since a better time in the 2nd round would have given them a chance to ride for gold, so it would make no sense to assume that they didn't given their best in the 2nd round). Not sure why you felt the need to use a completely different definition of "top teams" just to keep the discussion going ...

Whatever the reason was for France not making it into the bronze final last year doesn't matter for this discussion and of course neither of us knows what time they could/would/should have gone. Germany is closer to the top teams time wise than last year, although their ranking this year doesn't reflect it.

Given the relative strengths of the teams, Germany had to bring their A-game to the second round to have a chance to ride for bronze. I don’t see them delivering a faster time in a third ride. NL and AUS did not need to post their fastest time in the second round. If based on the times in the second round you want to believe that Germany is closer to the two top teams, no one can stop you.