mpjmcevoy

Worth noting that MMA was once more or less known as 'no holds barred', the most brutal form of combat sport....but almost immediately, certain holds and techniques were barred! Eye gouging, fishhooking and, more important for this discussion "small joint manipulation" - i.e torture submissions based on breaking fingers and toes. Holds that work in te real world...but are unacceptable in the sport. Any martial art that becomes a sport compromises - what do you think boxing gloves are? My problem with karate is following the scoring and understanding what scores and what doesn't. The action itself looks interesting, but its hard to read a context. Under no circumstances whatsoever should we see fierce growling and staring at invisible people - Kata - ever return to the games - the only event more shambolic that B-girl Raygun. What next, Haka?

GB had that for 20 years : track cycling and a lesser extent rowing. The rest of the world has caught up. GBR can never hope to have the sort of one sport dominance that China has in Table tennis - the sport is an absolute obsession in china, and they have the guts of a billion and a half people. They are also brilliant at diving, but I genuinely don't believe that is unassailable - it used to be the USA Obviously if classic British pub sports like snooker or darts where in, they would be perennial winners and medalists. But they ain't. GB has always been a 'jack of all trades' sports nation, not least because it codified so many of the sports. Very few nations have the 'spred' of medals that GB does - really only USA and China, frankly. Some nations historically punch above their weight - Australia and Netherlands, notably - but that is often down to a kind of ruthlessness in targeting, and other cultural issues. There are a few sports I believe GBR should be better at than they seem to be in an Olympic context - Sevens, most obviously, but also Archery, Badminton, Flatwater Canoe and Judo. some we seem to overachieve in - We are usually competitive in Shotgun despite a gun ban, Slalom canoe, and latterly gymnastics. And there are some sports with lots of medals that we seem to have little or no interest in whatsoever - Wrestling the most obvious, but also fencing and of course the team sports - water polo, volleyball, handball and most bizarrely basketball.

Some events were much easier to listen to on BBC, for all their faults. Some were better on RTÉ! And some were better on Eurosport. While ina few, the Radio nearly was better than the telly. In athletics, I like Cotter, Crammy and Jasmin, and Backley is pretty good too - I think Sawyers understanding of the Jumps is a real help to him, and I'd be disappointed if this doesn't end up her career after track is done - she has the knack. Merry on the radio is absolutely excellent. In swimming, I preferred the two Andy's just. Triathlon, despite the screw ups is BBCall day long. Diving is about 50/50 - Leon really brings great emotion and he clearly knows the sport, but the overall info is better on ES Equestrian, much preferred ES, as I did with Canoe and rowing, Climbing and, oddly, Golf. BBC better for tennis. Both BBC and ES are excellent on cycling, either was great. All in all, Discovery+/Eurosport was a bargain, all things considered - obviously 2012 style BBC saturation fo free is better, but there are much worse propositions than D+

I used to think so, but I genuinely wonder why not - the old Criterium International used to be a cracking three day stage race - TT, sprint stage and summit finish. Even if there is no medal for winning a stage, being able to say you have an Olympic stage race win would be epic on the palmares. you would need a larger group of teams of 4 to give the event shape, but that's doable, I think. The Maillot d'Or....has a certain panache, no?

It's ridiculous - the event is BETTER on wild water, the KX would be utterly heroic and make a lot of sense, and the venue could be any river in the country and some decent temporary stands - it would save millions upon millions

You are too kind - you forgot the words thick and misogynist.

Is that the sort of Parkour pursuit in a cage - if so, absolutely, perhaps as part of a set of parkour events including sprint and freerunning

... Modern Pentathlon: Poor Old Baron de C. They've just shredded the sport he invented. Of course the days of MP equestrian were numbered after that shocking German incident, but I did wonder if it might not be saved by a different means - for example, doing away with the whole 'unknown horse' thing and just let competitors train and bring their own - less likely, I'd hope to lead to the odd utter pony turning up (there's almost always one utter donkey, which if you have a black sense of humour is sometimes fun, and rather in keeping with the quasi-tragic stoicism of the event - sometimes, the cavalry officer's escape is going to go down the plughole because he grabbed the wrong mule) , and less likely to have competitors and coaches lose their mind and have a meltdown at a refusal. But that ship has sailed, and probably taken most of the current MPers with it, certainly Choong who all but threw his competition. The proposed obstacle event, a sort of tamed ninja warrior/Gladiators Eliminator/Krypton Factor assault course hybrid may actually be good fun - especially if, in wipeout style, there is opportunity to plunge into muddy water. But I cannot see it lasting as an Olympic event - MP, for better or worse, was essentially an equestrian event with a big run at the end. So sadly, I think it might be better to simply put the old beast out of its misery. Whatever is coming in LA - it's not MP, and if the Olympics are interested in the n inja Warrior/Tough Mudder/Assault course genre, better just to create it fresh. Proposal : drop Modern Pentathlon Rowing : I am absolutely unconvinced of the current format, various sizes of boat racing the one distance, with crews being shuffled around like a deck of cards in a poker game. The entry numbers in some of the events are also utterly obscure - 7 eights? 6 would work as a straight final, 8 would work as two semis and a repechage, all of 4) 7's just...nothing at all. Sweep v scull is a legitimate distinction, I don't have a problem with that (see also Kayak v Canadian canoe) Eights, coxed is a very important boat for historic reasons - it is essentially the main test of rowing depth Single sculls is obvious, as is a Pair, the smallest possible boats of their type So M1x, W1x, M2-, W2-, M8+, W8+ are a given Should the 1x and 2- be considered also for a 500 or 1000 metre, rather than lots more sizes of boats? Would the kind of rowers winning 500 be different from those winning 2000? To get balance, I might be tempted to allow the quad sculls, so the boats go, broadly 1,2,4,8 but with less obvious duplication - just one big boat, one small boat in each class, and stroke Finally, I've seen beach sprint coastal rowing - it's bloody fun, and I'm all for it - and I think the Canoers should be looking at outrigger canoes for similar fun and games So my proposal is 500 M : M1x, W1x, M2x, W2x 2000 M : M1x, W1X, M2-, W2-, Mix4x, Mix4-, M8+, W8+ Coastal : M1, W1 The greater number of 1x events reduces the number of quotas required quite a lot, which allows bigger fields in sensible events, including an 8 team field in the 8+ - you will note despite scullers having a few more events, the numbers of scullers and sweepers will remain roughly the same. Rugby Sevens : Grand as it is, no proposed change. Skateboarding : Park works, street doesn't. World Skate should consider if there are other skate disciplines that would be better served, while retaining the Park. I'll admit I have a hankering for some inline roller derby style action Proposal : Drop street, retain park Surfing After two games, I feel I can confidently make the statement - cool thing to do, crap thing to watch. I've tried, I've tried, but I just don't see the value - frankly the sailing Kite surfing was far more interesting to the casual viewer, and I had no faith it would be. I'm afraid this is one sport I'd bin. Proposal : Drop Surfing Sailing: Expensive sport but, a little secret, LOTS of people in the IOC hierarchy like it. More will simply have to be done to try and make something televisual of the sport - the kitesurfing actually came closest to pulling that off. The windsurfer brit was correct about the unfairness of the system, the kitesurfing system was fairer. But I can see this sport going, if I'm honest, along with the Equestrianism...

Golf: I think this was the year Golf realised the Olympics mattered, that it had a place in the narrative of the sport - Tennis arguably had that after Steffi, but more obviously after Andy Murray - to the point you saw what it meant to the GOAT, Djokovic. Well, Golf is on the same journey I think, and as a biased Irishman I wonder if it might be Rory McIlroy who provides the Andy style narrative. anyway, the two individual events are fine as is. It's the proposed team event gets me interested. I think it should happen, it should be matchplay, it should be teams of 4 - 2 men, 2 women, playing over nine hole matches - a kind of speed matchplay - in matches consisting of three 'rubbers' - M Singles, W Singles, Mixed foursome. 4 groups of 4 teams, round robins over 9 holes as I said - converting the old scoring system (2&1, 3 up etc) into 2 pts for win, 1 for tie, 0 for lost hole - with target obviously 10 (i.e 5 holes won or equivalent)...if the rubber is 9-9 after nine holes, tie break is simple 1 shot, nearest the pin on the 10th (or 1st, if playing 10-18). 1-9 and 10-18 will both be used and every group will play on both sets of 9 across the group stage. That creates a 27 hole group stage over a day and a half. Top 2 teams in each group then go to QF, another 9 hole shoot out. bottom 2 teams go into 'repechage' round, so after two days everyone has played 36 holes Day three is semi finals day : matches remain 3 rubber, but switch to 18 holes (winning score is now 19). Winners in top bracket go to final, losers meet the winners of repechage bracket/"bronze semis" day 4 is gold/silver final and bronzes finals, again 3 rubber, 18 holes total 72 holes maximum per player over 4 days Day morning afternoon 1 GS1 (24 rubbers) / GS2 (24 rubbers) 2 GS3 (24 rubbers) / Gold QF & Repechage/Bronze QF (24 rubbers) 3 <----- Gold Semis and Bronze Semis -----> (12 rubbers) 4 <------ Gold finals and Bronze finals ------> (9 rubbers) Qualification would simply be the highest 16 aggregate totals from the individual events. NOCs restricted to one team. Proposal : add 4 day, 72 hole team matchplay event in a speed matchplay format : no extra quotas Hockey No changes proposed Handball No changes proposed Judo I think the quotas should be trimmed a bit, it seems wrong to deny taekwondo or boxing its weight classes while having so many judoku and every class. The trimmed quotas would be sent in the first instance to taekwondo to allow it to field all its weights. Proposal : reduce quotas. Possibly remove team event if affected. Karate : In principle, I'm all for it. But the scoring system needs to be looked at urgently because it is utterly opaque to non insiders - it is to some extent easy to intuit what scores in judo or taekwondo, or boxing or wrestling. It is not at all clear in karate. If that includes a need to bring in sensor electronics, then do so. And, lets be clear. No Kata. I understand the importance of forms in the history of the sport, but it is utterly ludicrous to an outsider to have an Olympic medal for feirce grimacing and striking at a non existent enemy. Its pantomimic. Proposal bring back Kumite if scoring system/explanations improved. no return for Kata.

Cycling : Right...Princiople 3 applies. a velodrome is an expensive venue to build and while it's a great thing to have, it's not all that brilliant in design terms for multi-sport use. So if you're gonna build one/update one, you absolutely positively have to get bang for the buck. Secondly, given the nature of the events, cyclists can double and treble up nearly at will, so there's no need for a massive number of new quotas. Track : The entire worlds' program. All 22 races. Get that bastard velo working day after day. Indeed, I'd go as far as to say the velo will now be the tentpole for the second week of the three week Games. Lengthening the program also allows recovery for the cyclists to do multiple events, thus reducing a need for extra quotas. At a bare minimum, the return of the IP and the Kilo, but really, no, all 22. Road : This one is tough, as road fans are among the very few fans of any event who simply don't accept that the Olympics is going to mean some miniaturization of fields - they want their 140-180 man peloton and teams of 7 and 8, god damn it. Well, it ain't gonna happen. And I quite like that the Olympic race is a bit odd, and a bit old school. So I'd leave the races alone, with the caveat that more of the road racers should be allowed to do the TT - it costs no extra quotas. I'm afraid the tragic history of the Olympic TTT puts me off even thinking about adding it back. Irrational, but there you go. I would love an Olympic stage race, to use the country, and which would help fill up the third week (stage winners would not get medals but would still be a hefty feather in the cap), but I don't honestly think that's likely. BMX : I'm pretty happy with what we have, not convinced flatland BMX freestyle would add much - I would increase the freestyle fields very slightly though, and maybe introduce a heat, semi, final structure (16->12->8) MTB : Not convinced short track really adds to the menu - but if it can be fitted in the outdoor/nature venue with no extra quotas, its another days ticket sales. I wonder if an eliminator event might be more interesting. Equestrian: This sport is incredibly divisive, but it has a long history as part of the Games, and it is popular in a lot of countries. As a rule, I'm not a fan of people who don't like something being able to dictate to people who do if that something is not universally understood to be unacceptable - and however much some activists wish otherwise, the idea that using animals is inherently cruel is not universally accepted. If it were seeking admittance today, I'd say no, but it's not, it's already there. That said, I'd be happy to trim it back substantially in numbers, notwithstanding principle 3 Proposal: reduce quotas, otherwise no change Fencing: The presentation of the sport has improved beyond all measure in recent years, as they've finally realised what they have that works on a showbiz level, and what doesn't. I do find myself wondering if a mixed event in each sword would be more efficient than six team events that suck up so many of the quota places. But leave it be for the time being, I suppose, perhaps fiddle with qualification system. Proposal no change Football (soccer) Women's soccer is absolutely safe and fine and embedded in Olympic culture. Men's soccer is a shitshow. It sells bucketloads of tickets, so IOC are loathe to lose it. IT gets players injured, so clubs are loathe to tolerate it. and FIFA wants to protect the primacy of its own event, so won't really help it. I repeat, it's a shitshow. But one that many countries, though from all, care quite a lot about. FWIW, I think FIFA should be considering downsizing the men's tournament to 12 teams in 2 groups of six with only medal finals (still maximum 6 games per team as today, but 32 total matches rather than 31), and using the released quotas for a small futsal tourney. Proposal : Shrink Men's field to 12, add Futsal Gymnastics : the 'support' tentpole for the middle week, along with cycling FIG are missing a trick, IMHO not including tumbling, trampoline synchro and double mini trampoline. They are fun explosive events. Aerobic and Acrobatic, not so much Proposal : add tumbling, double mini trampoline, and trampoline synchro. Field need not be huge - 12 in each tumbling event and double mini event, 8 pairs in each synchro event

Badminton : no changes. Basketball : I'm not a fan, personally, of 3 x 3. I'm not, truth be told, a huge fan of the sport generally - I consider it monotonous compared to other team sports, not least in who wins medals. But it clearly has a huge fan base, so it stays. Would not be opposed to bringing 3x3 into an urban park venue, while sending the four groups for the full court (2 men, 2 women) to four different cities, one venue each Boxing : Unless the WB successfully takes over, bin it. If they do take over, it's time to leave behind the pretend professionalization nonsense. Like the other Olympic martial arts, but unlike pro boxing and MMA, Olympic boxing is not primarily about causing damage, but demonstrating expertise. The corruption in both the IBA and IOC organised versions is unspeakable, and much of it comes down to binning a system that, while flawed, ironed out corruption - as if IBA actively WANTED to have room for corruption. We should probably return to a points scoring system based on buzzers, and possibly allowing a higher count of points for combinations and power punches to encourage those two things. We also need one more women's weight class. IF you want to see bloodshed for bloodshed's sake I would politely suggest the Olympics are not for you. Within that context, there should be investigation as to whether a repechage system were possible, so that bronzes are won in bronze finals, not lost in semi finals. Baseball/Softball : It's very simple here. Either MLB plays right, or we bin it. And it stays binned. If we keep it, the teams need to be a good bit smaller - 24 person squads is frankly self indulgent in an Olympic context. 18 should be sufficient, and allow the tournament to expand to eight teams. those eight teams should not play in groups but in one eight team ladder - at the end of which teams 3-6 play QF, the winners to join 1-2 in the semis. Canoe: oy vey... 1. Slalom Principle 3 kicks in here quite hard. A proper slalom course is expensive to build. If you're gonna build it, don't be shy using it. Go nuts. also, casuals tend to prefer slalom because it looks wild. I like Kayak X. It's not a purist's sport, but the general fan that the Olympics attracts is not purist. We cater to both here. Frankly, I'd watch the hell out of a K2X but we'll not go there for now!! On that subject C2 should be brought back, for both sexes, and a Luge style mixed time trial relay considered, although this would require some jiggery pokery with how quotas are distributed - you'd want a minimum of eight teams all having 1 WK1, 1 MK1, 1WC1 and 1 MC1, so you might want to have those eight nations qualify a single boat in each class by overall national ranking rather than individually by qualification event, or/and have a final team qualification event. All this would probably require a few extra quotas, but have at it! Slalom proposal : M C1, M K1, M C2, MKX, WC1, WK1, WC2, WKX, MixedTeam - 9 events 2: Sprint, or as I would prefer it called , Flatwater does not require a huge build, it simply cannibalises the rowing We need the openwater 5000m canoe event x 2, hence the change in nomenclature Otherwise C1, K1, x 200 C2, K2 x 500 C1, K1, C2, K4 x 1000 = 18 events Total of 27 canoe events, possibly the largest expansion of quotas I'd argue for. Sports Climbing : I've heard the arguments to split Boulder& Lead, and understand them, but to me it goes in the same box as weightlifting, The best overall climber creates more interesting dynamic. So I'd keep as is. I do worry the speed event may get tedious after a while, not withstanding its a spectacular skill. But we'll stick with it a while yet for all that. No change Cricket : As with baseball, the ICC have to play ball, and the tournament should be eight teams each - cricket gets by quite nicely with squads of 13 and 14. I'd love both tournaments to be played as a super eight - a full round robing, but that depends on the appetite of the hosts. 4 x 2 is just as good if the hosts aren't fussed on volume. For qualification: Host Top ranked Asian Top ranked European/African Top Ranked Americas Top Ranked Pacific. final three by qualification tournaments, one Asia-only, One Africa-Pacific, One Euro-American /2

The US women have not a lost a single Olympic basketball match in 61 Games. Not a tournament, not a group. A single MATCH since 1992 when the pros arrived. .In that time, China have lost 12 diving events. Why don't you smell what you're shovellin'?

Not when the 1 out of 8 happens three times in succession in three different events.

OK...I apologise in advance, I LOVE this kinda crap, so this might go on a bit. Principles : 1. While athlete numbers should not explode, the current quota limits are not sacrosanct, for the reason outlined in Principle 2 2. Having day -2 and -1 is all a bit silly, and there were actual nations eliminated in competitions prior to the Opening Ceremony. That is ridiculous and anti-Olympian. So yes, we need to bite the bullet and go to a three week/23 day Summer Games. This will have the advantage that we can bring athletes in and out of the village in shifts - perhaps with some kind of mid games ceremony for those leaving before the end, arriving after the start. In any event, having athletes in and out in shifts means no need to expand Olympic village 3. Venues should give bang for the buck - if you're gonna bother building and outfitting venues, use them as much as you can, if only to get more ticket sales - the idea of reducing events held in big builds is bonkers. Likewise, do not be afraid to spread team sports beyond the city like football does. 4. New sports and events should show some global reach to get in, but we shouldn't bin events with a history that currently lack it. Respect the history, even if we change it going forward. 5. Try not to get too hooked on judged events - the halo effect is dispiriting to other countries. Certainly don't create too many new ones - measurement should be objective and artistic expression is for the Tate Modern, not Wembley. 6. This one is important, I cannot repeat it enough. No Breaking. Just to be clear. None. No breaking ever, anywhere. And especially not in Australia. 7. If a sport exists in multiple valid forms, try and reflect those forms unless it causes huge bloat. Archery : Currently 5 Events, 128 quotas (Men I, Mean T, Women I, Women T, Mixed T - all target, all recurve) The invention of the Olympic scoring system breaking Archery into sets has been a huge success IMHO. It even introduces a bit of jeopardy in a sport that has one very dominant country. I don't see much need to introduce 'clout' or for that matter 'compound' archery, despite the relative popularity of the latter, it just feels lik recurve for weaker arms. I DO think there is room for a field archery styled event, testing archers on uneven ground, irregular targets and at pace. Proposal : Keep all current events. Add 2 individual field events, based at the mountain bike course (which now becomes the 'outdoor/nature' venue), using fixed cameras above multiple targets designed to avoid crossfire risk, which archers attempt in a fixed order, walking between targets with a time penalty applicable for slow play, a bit like a golf course. Add 32 quotas total for these events. Consider 'barebow' as the bow in question. Real 'Robin Hood' quality to event. Proposed : 7 Events, 160 Quotas if required, the men's and women's teams can be reduced to men's and women's pairs, with those 24 quotas going to the field event. Athletics : Currently 48 events, around 2000 quotas To go: 4x400 mixed relay, heptathlon To come in : Middle Distance Medley x 1 800 man, 800 woman, 1500 man, 1500 woman., women's decathlon x 1 I am open to idea that women's decathlon gets triple jump instead of PV and hammer instead of discus cross-country x2 at the Outdoor/Nature venue Athletics will continue to be the tentpole sport of the now third week of the Games. Cross Country will be at the end of week one. Only a few extra quotas will be required. Proposed 50 events, quotas basically unchanged. Aquatics: Artistic swimming Team to become mixed/open event, no other changes, no additions Diving : currently 8 events To go : none, but no more than 2 host places in synchro. Reduce individual dive quotas by 2 per event (16, not 18) To add: Mixed team event x 1 - no extra quotas, up to 4 divers, but can compete with two. Entry based entirely on already qualified divers. 8 dives in following order : W10, M3, W3, M10, W3, M10, W10, W3 To add: High dive (20/27) at same venue as coastal rowing etc : 2 x 12 Swimming: Bite the bullet, the public loves the splash and dash events, and swimming venues sell out. I get non swimming fans resent the number medals on offer, but they're not on offer to please non-swimming fans. Add 50m strokes events = 6 Add 4 x 200 mixed medley relay. =1 (no extra quotas) Open Water: Add 4 x 2500 mixed relay =1 , no extra quotas needed. Water polo No changes Proposal 11 extra events; new quota places for 50 metre strokes, otherwise broadly within quotas as is. further point - try to use FIFA ranking system to give a more even spread of universality places /1

It's not about 'math' it's about predictability - the men's basketball is every bit as uncompetitive as the synchro diving. Your issue seems not to be with predictable medals but predictable Chinese medals - predictable US ones are A-ok with you. Screw that, it's just jingoism.

it's very interesting that, but for the Ujah screw up the last three Olympics, with very different gold totals would all have hit exactly 65 medals (and London hit 67) - one can get disappointed about the gold total - I am - but I think the US are right on one thing, total medals is a better measure of overall sporting health, if not of Olympic glory, and a consistent total suggests some sort of systemic stability. Throw in the enormous number of 4th and 5ths.. That said, I don't want TOO much stability, and look forward to the real review digging into the failings.

Squash rather fills up the 'gap' to give a full set of raquet sports - Squash (and racketball), badminton, table tennis, tennis (incl Padel) feels like a pretty good balance, and the 'glass cube' invention for Squash completely nullifies the historic arguments about watching it - with the right kind of TV friendly ball, it begins to look like a madly addictive computer game, Pong on metaphorical steroids! Take your point on Baseball in Brisbane. The thing is the Olympics is the platform where you sell your sport to the world, you show its world relevance - THAT's how you eventually make it stick - Cricket has the EVERY continent advantage - Windies and CAN (NAm), GBR, IRL and NED (EU), RSA, ZIM, NAM and KEN (Afr), AUS and NZL (and pos PNG) (Oce), IND, PAK, SRI, BAN, AFG and UAE (Asi), which it shares to an extent with Hockey and Sevens, and obviously, obviously football. Baseball doesn't. It is loved fiercely where it is loved (Japan and the Americas, with a niche following in Australia and non cricketing Europe)- and it is a fabulous game, really - but the outreach is dreadfully poor.

Now, lets be fair, Ireland OFFERED to give up their spot for them. There's a history of camaraderie between the Irish and some native American peoples going back nearly 200 years, and the Irish set up were keen that the history of Lacrosse be respected. It bought the Irish team a lot of good will to be fair, and helped the international lacrosse authorities out of a bit of a hole. In terms of LA28, I'm hoping that the Iroquois get the 'host' place, while the USA National team is allowed to attempt qualify as USA2 (they will do so at a cantor, as will Canada) One team from Europe, One team from Asia, two teams from Americas, One host, and a final qualifier that includes Africa and Australasia - That would result in USA1, USA2 (but very distinct teams), CAN, GBR, JPN and probably one of ITA, RSA or AUS given the small fields, the best thing for lacrosse is to get eyes on a qualification process - the IOC Qualification series made mistakes but it actually worked pretty well as a primer on Sports Climbing, Skateboard and BMX freestyle - something similar for the final qualifiers of these team sports would be good for eyeballs, good for keeping teams in the hunt for the Games, and allow the feds to iron out problems ahead of LA 28 (the RWC final qualification tournament already uses this kind of system pretty effectively, and the European Games ran the final rugby qualifiers very well) Baseball has a decision to make, because the MLB attitude stinks - The NBA see the value in Olympics, the NHL has come round to it, and even the damn NFL are likely to try and be more open, to sell their game. They got first mover advantage on their main niche rival, cricket, and they've squandered it - repeatedly. I don't expect, for all its flaws, cricket will - it is too good a chance to bring Olympic value to India, and cricket value outside the powerful ICC nations. So Baseball - possibly staring down the barrel of the next two Games in cricket mad countries, needs to pull its finger out and actively push itself out there for this. FWIW I think 6 spots is simply too few for a sensible Olympic tournament. I think 8 is the bare minimum you can really justify, with 12 a better number for everything but football. But 8 is justifiable, and doable. I think the more successful sports should follow footballs lead, though, and consider holding the events 'around the country' to ease the load on the host city proper - even if the final medal matches go to LA.

Given its only non-Olympic classes, holding it as close as possible to the Games actually makes sense and gives a tiny bit of pseudoolympic lustre to the events

Is this Orangehair under a sock?

I think the entire purpose of getting cricket back into the fold is the Subcontinent - it's the one remaining 'black hole' for Olympic sport; all the other continents are very on board with Olympics, but the subcontinent still has a hit or miss relationship with any sport that isn't cricket.

The fairest way is probably a handful of places by rankings (which will miraculously protect India, Australia and Eng) followed by a decent and interesting final qualification tournament. The thought occurs that in both Aus and if they get it in 36 India, the crowds you get for cricket would be similar to those you historically get for football eslewhere, so one could imagine a much larger tournament sent around the country the way football is, as a ticket seller. I wouldn't even rule out a twelve team comp in those circumstances which would allow all the continents 1 'ranked' team (or 2 in Asia), plus host, and still have four-five slots for qualifiers. Cricket, like hockey, doesn't need a huge number of 'sus' the way football does and baseball seems to - you could very easily restrict teams to 14 or even 13, much more in line with sevens and basketball sized squads

Ah, Bromley Tiddlers syndrome. No-one gives a damn about tiddlywinks until Bromley Rangers, the local club, unexpectedly reach the National Grand Final to face the might of Edgeworth Casuals. Then by Tuesday, every man, woman and child in Bromley is an expert winker. (see also, Curling)

Pity if he missed all the golf as the last round, and particularly the last nine holes, were very decent watchable sport, with big name players who clearly still cared. He's very well know and successful in prizemoney terms, Tommy Fleetwood, for example, but an Olympic silver is actually probably one of his biggest one off 'wins'

I have a hunch India may bid to host in 2036, so of course cricket would be nailed on again there - if they have three Games in succession like that, you may well not get the sport out. Flag football looks good fun, but it's a real "America, you're not the world" thing - one wonders if Brisbane might be tempted to add a version of AFL or rugby League nines by analogy. More likely Nines in Queensland, I 'd suspect. Lacross is odd - a bit like netball its a quietish international sport, but is played rather more widely than you'd assume from its roots.