Cricket In the U.S.A. - My First Blog Rant

The sport of cricket gets very little respect in the U.S., and it's understandable. Most Americans have never really seen the sport. There are some interesting articles on the web about how the situation got that way in the first place (see http://convention.allacademic.com/asa2004/view_paper_info.html?pub_id=1809&part_id1=22794 and http://www.pop.umn.edu/~eroberts/cricket.pdf ), but I'm more interested in where we go from here.

Right now there are a number of thriving community-level cricket leagues throughout the U.S. (in my area there are 3 leagues - the NCCA, the BACA, and the TCA). These leagues can't by themselves make inroads into the non-immigrant population, though (I'm the only player I've seen in the TCA league who is not of South Asian descent). Indeed, it requires great audacity for any local league to see itself as cricket evangelists and not simply a small institution to allow immigrants to enjoy a bit of their own sporting culture. That role should be taken up by the big boys - the USACA and the ICC. Sadly, the USACA is at best internally conflicted and narrowly focused (and that's being generous - even the corrupt dictatorship in Zimbabwe seems to have a more effective cricket board than the U.S., and more support from the ICC).

It seems part of the problem is that no one is accountable for spreading the game. And even worse, when someone tries to do something which might help spread the game, those organizations which have a duty to assist them instead start a turf war and deliberately hinder them. Case in point: the U.S. Pro Cricket league last year. It was a very exciting idea to have pro cricket teams play in 8 cities around the country with some world-class foreign marquee players. But the ICC effectively prevented all but a few of the name players from arriving, and forced a shift in the focus of the Pro Cricket organization from spreading the game to simply putting something together. To their credit, they threw something together which was entertaining. To my dismay, though, they don't seem organized at all.

All that mess pales in comparison, though, to the short-sightedness of the major cricket boards' television strategy. Television is viewed as a revenue stream rather than an opportunity to spread the game (and not just in the U.S.). Americans will watch almost anything on tv - lumberjack contests, hot-dog eating contests, and now poker is a hit. Why not cricket?

I'll tell you why... they expect people to pay $80 and up to watch a cricket series. Even the very cheapest international matches are $10 live streamed over the internet. If I said there's a great sport called "florg", and you can watch it for just $10, what would you say? Watch your language, there, pal... My point is that to Americans who are not immigrants from test-playing nations cricket is "florg".

Steven R. Covey talks in "The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People" about the importance of "p-work" (where "p" stands for "potential". He gives the example of someone tasked with digging a ditch in an alligator-infested swamp. The poor guy has to fight off alligators almost all the time, but if he doesn't occasionally stop and shovel some dirt he'll stay in the swamp until he's too tired to fight off the 'gators. That's where cricket is in the U.S. - lots of alligators, and not much digging. With the sport of soccer, by contrast, it was nowhere in the U.S. 25 years ago, but thanks to free Spanish-language the game built momentum and has a solid presence here. And more Americans who don't even speak any foreign languages have heard of Spanish-language announcer Andres Cantor than Don Bradman, Ian Botham, Garry Sobers, or any other English-speaking cricket legend.

Okay, enough ranting.