Posted: 05 March 2011 at 7:37am | IP Logged
Originally posted by Ashrozia
Why don't they get paid more ? B'coz that sport is not watched as much, so I'd obviously blame cricket for that ! & please, Vishy Anand is another great sportsman from our country - the No.1 chess player in the world for most of time. How much does he get paid when compared to Cricketers ?
Indirectly, cricket is responsible for all the nonsense. Because it obviously sells more than the other sports. In England, Football sells the best, but you don't see their Cricketers going on strikes for getting paid less, do you ? Same for Australia, where AFL/NRL sells more.
Oh seriously !? How well did India played in 2007 WC ? Still, did it popularity decrease !? Indian hockey won Olympic golds, doesn't that matter ? How can you say they never played well !?
Hahahaha..let Brett Lee get 200 crores, then we'd see. Btw, I have seen many people declining when they get more than what they deserve, the Cricketers have MOREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE and enough.
India may overtake Australia, it has not yet happened. When it happens, we'd see ! Besides, most of Indian wins come at home, how good is their record all over the world ? As good as Australia, hmm ?? What happened in the WC T20 last year, and Champions Trophy ??
LOL that's like entering a beauty contest where you come second and then blaming the winner for being more prettier than you.
It's virtually impossible to get majority of India, a cricket loving nation to watch ALL sports like tennis, badminton, snooker, hockey and football. Many of these sports have not been around for as long as cricket either and in time they will gather more fans. There are fans and followers of the sports in all parts of India but we are good at very few - like chess which barely gets much attention from any part of the world, forget just India. You can also argue the amount of fitness, physical problems and all the rest that cricketers have to go through is a lot lot more than what a chess player would have to go through, so to some extent what they get paid is justified.
India didn't play well in the WC but they do not consistently lose matches. Home or away record doesn't matter much when looking at the rankings, the fact is that they win more matches than they lose. Oh I remember what happened at T20 last year, do you happen to remember the first year of T20 though? Remember, the year India actually won the tournament?
Btw, I never said India never play well in other sports. I was referring to the Football and the Asia Cup where our performance was embarrassing to say the least. Winning a couple of olympic golds or Commonwealth medals isn't going to suddenly increase the popularity of a game. People will take pride in their nation, yes, but only consistent performances will make people want to watch the game, as well as of course media hype.