March 23, 2014

Can T20 get America interested?

Cricket learned lessons from baseball in devising its shortest format. Can it use T20 to break into the home of baseball?
  shares 106

This week I've been driving to the Sydney Cricket Ground to work - not for an 11-a-side game but one played by teams of nine men.

The famous old cricket ground has been transformed into a baseball diamond, complete with dirt base paths and a pitcher's mound, to host a two-game series between US major league teams the Los Angeles Dodgers and the Arizona Diamondbacks. This might seem like sacrilege on a ground that was home for many years to Don Bradman when he was the greatest batsman alive. However, it seems that this may not be the case, because back in 1932, when Bradman was touring North America, he met the equally famous George Herman "Babe" Ruth at another sporting cathedral, Yankee Stadium. During that meeting the Babe asked Bradman what impressed him about baseball and the Australian icon answered; "In two hours or so the match is finished. Each batter comes up four or five times. Each afternoon's play stands on its own. Yes, cricket could learn a lot from baseball… there is more snap and dash to baseball."

Well, some 70 years on, Bradman's wishes were granted. Cricket has learned a lot from baseball in devising a game that lasts around three hours; it's called T20.

At the same time as the Dodgers and the Diamondbacks are battling for supremacy at the SCG, many of the best cricketers are in Bangladesh, fighting for the right to be called World T20 champions. Already we've seen some upsets, and appropriately, one of cricket's great rivalries kicked off the main section of the draw, with India completing a comprehensive victory over Pakistan.

The rivalry between the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees in baseball is often compared to India's and Pakistan's intense battles with each other. The big difference being the cricket rivalry has survived wars and terrorist attacks and yet still creates enormous interest in the two countries.

Apart from the time it takes to play a T20 game, one of the big attractions is that it's more likely to involve upsets than the longer forms of the game. One team only needs to have an exceptionally good over, or the other a particularly bad one, and the complexion of the game can change dramatically. The minnows are more likely to mix it with the cricketing superpowers in the game's shortest version.

In addition to the requirement that it satisfy the needs of a fast-moving world, T20 also affords cricket its greatest opportunity to globalise. It's impossible to sell five-day matches to major markets like the USA, Europe, Japan, and the parts of Asia where cricket isn't a tradition. However, there is an opportunity to have those regions embrace a short version of the game, and this is where T20 can play a major role in the development of cricket.

So while India and Pakistan continue their rivalry and other heavyweights like Australia, England, West Indies, Sri Lanka and South Africa join in the fight for the silverware, it's interesting to witness the development of Associate nations like the Netherlands, Ireland, Nepal and Afghanistan as they scrap for relevance in world cricket.

The one name missing from that list of Associate nations battling to mix it with the big boys is the USA. Their progress has been slowed by infighting amongst the various groups in their administration, but maybe the emergence of the fledgling but innovative American Cricket Federation will finally get the game in the USA on track.

There's no doubt that cricket's hierarchy would love nothing better than to welcome the USA into the main draw of a World T20 tournament. If that does eventuate, cricket fans could witness the reverse of the amazing transformation that the SCG has undergone, at one of the legendary homes of baseball, like Yankee Stadium or Fenway Park.

Former Australia captain Ian Chappell is now a cricket commentator for Channel 9, and a columnist

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • on March 23, 2014, 17:52 GMT

    I'm American and I been following cricket for about 4 years. Well, I know all three formats of cricket very well and I also know the sport very well. Cricket is not a very hard sport to understand but it is hard to play. I like the Test format because of the intensity and the pure skills that cricketers have in each test match. The majority of American cricket fans are Indian, Pakistani, Sri Lankans, Bangladeshi descent people. They are slowly building several cricket grounds here in America including the one in Indianapolis. T20 will help Americans understand the sport before they move up watching ODIs and Test cricket. African American participation in baseball is dwindling since the early 90s. I believe they need a third sport to follow besides football and basketball. We have Willow TV and ESPN3 to cover cricket. Willow TV is pretty cheap. Well, Americans will have to support a Test nation like the West Indies or Australia. lol

  • jay57870 on March 27, 2014, 11:30 GMT

    Ian - Whew! On the one hand Chappelli preaches "Drop a format, or restrict T20": he fears the rapid expansion of T20 exposes the game's "huge dependence on India's financial clout". And now Ian wants to expand T20 globally: no qualms as he flips over to welcome mighty USA & oodles of its green dough. Whew! But why USA? Why not Canada? Canada beat USA in 1844 in the first ever international cricket match. In the late 1990s, the Toronto Cricket, Skating & Curling Club hosted over 20 official ODIs - incl 15 Ind-Pak "friendship" matches. WI also played Ind & Pak there. Cricket is also played at the popular Rogers Centre (SkyDome) - home of the Toronto Blue Jays baseball team. Contrasting Canada's active role as an Associate, it's hard to see any "amazing transformation" in USA anytime soon. Recall that in Bradman's 1932 "honeymoon" tour of USA-Canada, the Babe told off The Don: "You mean to tell me you don't have to run when you hit the ball?" No meeting of the minds. True even today!

  • jay57870 on March 27, 2014, 1:38 GMT

    If Chappelli is really serious about T20 as the "greatest opportunity to globalise", then he must walk the talk: Why not become ICC's Global Ambassador? There are two paths to take: First - Commonwealth Games. It's a golden opportunity: 2018 CWG is in Gold Coast, right in Ian's backyard! Good opportunity too to get Zimbabwe & Eire back into the CWG family. Second - Olympics. It's the next natural event after CWG. The doors would open up to nations around the world. As an equal opportunity, it would welcome not only the "big boys" of America but also the "small guys" from Afghanistan, Nepal, etc. Note that cricket's been tried before at both CWG (Malaysia,1998) & Olympics (France,1900). But that was before T20, so they failed. Now here's what needs to happen: CA & ECB must take the lead; BCCI must be convinced; ICC must deal. The Global Ambassador's work is ideally cut out for Chappelli. It surely would be more rewarding than covering baseball games & hot dogs at SCG. Right, Ian?

  • on March 26, 2014, 7:55 GMT

    Ashok16 made a great point about subtlety. Baseball is a game that appears simple but is in actual fact incredibly nuanced - this is something I've come to realise after watching the last 3 MLB seasons (I'm a Kiwi cricket lover). T20, in its current guise, lacks the cut and thrust of repeated innings that is a great river of strategy and nuance. I'd love to see a version of the game that had 2 innings of 10 overs each (I remember watching one at Cardiff in the early 2000s). Perhaps that game would have a chance of taking hold in the States. It is, after all, a place that loves a story of redemption and recovery from failure, something baseball offers repeatedly, but one innings cricket doesn't.

  • T20istheworldgame on March 26, 2014, 2:19 GMT

    T20 is more entertaining than baseball.

    T20 Cricket gives the viewer more action for their buck than baseball,

    For example:

    baseball can go something like this: fowl ball, fowl ball, ball, strike, hit....out.

    T20 gives the viewer 360 degrees of hitting space of which they can sit anywhere in the oval to see the action: 6 balls goes something like this; 6, dot ball, 2, dot ball, 4, 1.

    The intensity of T20 keeps the viewer on edge the whole game.

    It is a very marketable product for attracting different audience types. I mean have a look at the NBA, you don't even have to be a basketball fan to see how interesting is.

  • on March 25, 2014, 8:53 GMT

    Ice hockey seens expection to norm,nice sport to watch fast,brutal I wish I could have played it problem we don't have much snow in africa to ignite interest in cold weather sports. With that been said I would really love to see the usa inn cricket they also seem to be bulish, aggresive, attacking when it comes to sport much like the aus. Throwin a spanner in the works may prove interesting in the icc and even rugby where only the tri-nation countries dominant irb ranking with the eng takin 3rd spot when one of nz,sa,aus are havin a bad run

  • on March 25, 2014, 8:36 GMT

    I'm saf, cricket is too complex for us public to consume, there are too many factors & techinques that have to be considered for their sporting minds to comprehend: pitch condition,coin toss,in & out swinger, reverse swing,seamj bowling, cross seam,leg cutter,leg spin,off spin,googly,doorsa,the batting techinques,cricket shots,fielding positions and with modern cricket more invention to the slingers,ramp shot etc is only going to get more complicated for americans to appreciate the gentlemens game. Just look at popular sport in the us baseball is one-dimensional throw,hit okay maybe that simplistic, and the start and stop called football not a bad game but when compared to rugby it look a bunch of overly padded guy running to touchline every five min going through text books hopin to find what to do next, basketball not so bad I feel court too small and players too for games to be strategic. Ice hockey seens expection to norm,nice sport to watch fast,

  • on March 25, 2014, 8:21 GMT

    The ICC and the major cricketing bodies around the world have a terrible record capitalising on established markets let alone new geographies around the world. Look how many years it took the IPL to even come on the radar and that was only because of Zee TVs ICL giving things a push. In England which is touted as one of the "Big 3"', cricket is pretty much a minority sport. Apart from core cricket enthusiasts, does anybody know the world t20 is going on? Most people don't even remember England once were t20 champions. FIFA and the IRB( rugby) have a much better record in spreading their respective sports around the globe. Look at the approach of the 2015 wc, in that the ICC wanted to restrict the tournament to the core cricketing playing nations. Cricket administrators need to sort themselves out in places cricket is already "popular", otherwise in twenty years from now the sport won't exist to export to other markets.

  • Jagger on March 25, 2014, 5:10 GMT

    I feel genuine pride and happiness to see Americans enjoying cricket. If it were not for America and their turning back the Japanese advance in the Coral Sea, the memory of Sir Donald Bradman may well be long gone. Thank you America. The very essence of my being as an Australian is the legacy of Sir Donald. With resolute hope I will see it continue on through the future generations, properly understood and recognised not only in Australia but worldwide. His record will never be beaten. No sportsman has or ever will dominate a sporting contest on the world stage like The Don. I was delighted to see Ian Chappell explain it to the American people watching the LA Dodgers vs the Arizona D'Backs at the SCG last week. I hope it was well received. The one fear I have is if Test cricket dies then so too does a part of The Don. I hope that day never comes. For things to stay the same, things must change and I hope beyond all hope America, through T20, can save us once again.

  • on March 25, 2014, 1:45 GMT

    If it is going to succeed in the USA, it would have to take root in Florida and spread across the USA from there.

  • on March 23, 2014, 17:52 GMT

    I'm American and I been following cricket for about 4 years. Well, I know all three formats of cricket very well and I also know the sport very well. Cricket is not a very hard sport to understand but it is hard to play. I like the Test format because of the intensity and the pure skills that cricketers have in each test match. The majority of American cricket fans are Indian, Pakistani, Sri Lankans, Bangladeshi descent people. They are slowly building several cricket grounds here in America including the one in Indianapolis. T20 will help Americans understand the sport before they move up watching ODIs and Test cricket. African American participation in baseball is dwindling since the early 90s. I believe they need a third sport to follow besides football and basketball. We have Willow TV and ESPN3 to cover cricket. Willow TV is pretty cheap. Well, Americans will have to support a Test nation like the West Indies or Australia. lol

  • jay57870 on March 27, 2014, 11:30 GMT

    Ian - Whew! On the one hand Chappelli preaches "Drop a format, or restrict T20": he fears the rapid expansion of T20 exposes the game's "huge dependence on India's financial clout". And now Ian wants to expand T20 globally: no qualms as he flips over to welcome mighty USA & oodles of its green dough. Whew! But why USA? Why not Canada? Canada beat USA in 1844 in the first ever international cricket match. In the late 1990s, the Toronto Cricket, Skating & Curling Club hosted over 20 official ODIs - incl 15 Ind-Pak "friendship" matches. WI also played Ind & Pak there. Cricket is also played at the popular Rogers Centre (SkyDome) - home of the Toronto Blue Jays baseball team. Contrasting Canada's active role as an Associate, it's hard to see any "amazing transformation" in USA anytime soon. Recall that in Bradman's 1932 "honeymoon" tour of USA-Canada, the Babe told off The Don: "You mean to tell me you don't have to run when you hit the ball?" No meeting of the minds. True even today!

  • jay57870 on March 27, 2014, 1:38 GMT

    If Chappelli is really serious about T20 as the "greatest opportunity to globalise", then he must walk the talk: Why not become ICC's Global Ambassador? There are two paths to take: First - Commonwealth Games. It's a golden opportunity: 2018 CWG is in Gold Coast, right in Ian's backyard! Good opportunity too to get Zimbabwe & Eire back into the CWG family. Second - Olympics. It's the next natural event after CWG. The doors would open up to nations around the world. As an equal opportunity, it would welcome not only the "big boys" of America but also the "small guys" from Afghanistan, Nepal, etc. Note that cricket's been tried before at both CWG (Malaysia,1998) & Olympics (France,1900). But that was before T20, so they failed. Now here's what needs to happen: CA & ECB must take the lead; BCCI must be convinced; ICC must deal. The Global Ambassador's work is ideally cut out for Chappelli. It surely would be more rewarding than covering baseball games & hot dogs at SCG. Right, Ian?

  • on March 26, 2014, 7:55 GMT

    Ashok16 made a great point about subtlety. Baseball is a game that appears simple but is in actual fact incredibly nuanced - this is something I've come to realise after watching the last 3 MLB seasons (I'm a Kiwi cricket lover). T20, in its current guise, lacks the cut and thrust of repeated innings that is a great river of strategy and nuance. I'd love to see a version of the game that had 2 innings of 10 overs each (I remember watching one at Cardiff in the early 2000s). Perhaps that game would have a chance of taking hold in the States. It is, after all, a place that loves a story of redemption and recovery from failure, something baseball offers repeatedly, but one innings cricket doesn't.

  • T20istheworldgame on March 26, 2014, 2:19 GMT

    T20 is more entertaining than baseball.

    T20 Cricket gives the viewer more action for their buck than baseball,

    For example:

    baseball can go something like this: fowl ball, fowl ball, ball, strike, hit....out.

    T20 gives the viewer 360 degrees of hitting space of which they can sit anywhere in the oval to see the action: 6 balls goes something like this; 6, dot ball, 2, dot ball, 4, 1.

    The intensity of T20 keeps the viewer on edge the whole game.

    It is a very marketable product for attracting different audience types. I mean have a look at the NBA, you don't even have to be a basketball fan to see how interesting is.

  • on March 25, 2014, 8:53 GMT

    Ice hockey seens expection to norm,nice sport to watch fast,brutal I wish I could have played it problem we don't have much snow in africa to ignite interest in cold weather sports. With that been said I would really love to see the usa inn cricket they also seem to be bulish, aggresive, attacking when it comes to sport much like the aus. Throwin a spanner in the works may prove interesting in the icc and even rugby where only the tri-nation countries dominant irb ranking with the eng takin 3rd spot when one of nz,sa,aus are havin a bad run

  • on March 25, 2014, 8:36 GMT

    I'm saf, cricket is too complex for us public to consume, there are too many factors & techinques that have to be considered for their sporting minds to comprehend: pitch condition,coin toss,in & out swinger, reverse swing,seamj bowling, cross seam,leg cutter,leg spin,off spin,googly,doorsa,the batting techinques,cricket shots,fielding positions and with modern cricket more invention to the slingers,ramp shot etc is only going to get more complicated for americans to appreciate the gentlemens game. Just look at popular sport in the us baseball is one-dimensional throw,hit okay maybe that simplistic, and the start and stop called football not a bad game but when compared to rugby it look a bunch of overly padded guy running to touchline every five min going through text books hopin to find what to do next, basketball not so bad I feel court too small and players too for games to be strategic. Ice hockey seens expection to norm,nice sport to watch fast,

  • on March 25, 2014, 8:21 GMT

    The ICC and the major cricketing bodies around the world have a terrible record capitalising on established markets let alone new geographies around the world. Look how many years it took the IPL to even come on the radar and that was only because of Zee TVs ICL giving things a push. In England which is touted as one of the "Big 3"', cricket is pretty much a minority sport. Apart from core cricket enthusiasts, does anybody know the world t20 is going on? Most people don't even remember England once were t20 champions. FIFA and the IRB( rugby) have a much better record in spreading their respective sports around the globe. Look at the approach of the 2015 wc, in that the ICC wanted to restrict the tournament to the core cricketing playing nations. Cricket administrators need to sort themselves out in places cricket is already "popular", otherwise in twenty years from now the sport won't exist to export to other markets.

  • Jagger on March 25, 2014, 5:10 GMT

    I feel genuine pride and happiness to see Americans enjoying cricket. If it were not for America and their turning back the Japanese advance in the Coral Sea, the memory of Sir Donald Bradman may well be long gone. Thank you America. The very essence of my being as an Australian is the legacy of Sir Donald. With resolute hope I will see it continue on through the future generations, properly understood and recognised not only in Australia but worldwide. His record will never be beaten. No sportsman has or ever will dominate a sporting contest on the world stage like The Don. I was delighted to see Ian Chappell explain it to the American people watching the LA Dodgers vs the Arizona D'Backs at the SCG last week. I hope it was well received. The one fear I have is if Test cricket dies then so too does a part of The Don. I hope that day never comes. For things to stay the same, things must change and I hope beyond all hope America, through T20, can save us once again.

  • on March 25, 2014, 1:45 GMT

    If it is going to succeed in the USA, it would have to take root in Florida and spread across the USA from there.

  • RodStark on March 25, 2014, 1:35 GMT

    I'm an Englishman who's lived in the US for 37 years and during that time (well, recently really), I've tried to explain cricket to some friends who are American sports fans, and I've even been able to get them to watch a bit. I think some things intrigue them: the fact that fielders still field brilliantly without wearing gloves; the variety of shots (360 degree field) compared to baseball. However, there sre other things they find off-putting or incomprehensible: the fact (T20) that there is only one innings per side, and hence no back and forth; the fact you don't have to run when you hit the ball; the impression that the players for the most part don't really look like the American ideal of an "athlete" (outstanding physical ability rather than subtle skills).

    I'll be interested to see whether the new facilities in Indianapolis (just up the road from me) make any difference or whether they'll just host matches for immigrants from the current cricket-playing countries.

  • on March 25, 2014, 0:07 GMT

    As a white American who was born in America and has NO ancestory from the subcontinent I definitely want to see US cricket mature into its full potential.

    I follow both MLB and all international cricket games, including the IPL, CPL and CLT20 and I enjoy cricket more than baseball in every aspect and am a diehard West Indies supporter.

    Unfortunately, cricket has a very negative stereotype attached to it in the US - where it is seen as a long, boring, "foreign" version of baseball that doesn't make any sense and should only be enjoyed by people of sub-continent, english, or caribbean descent.

    In order to establish cricket as a legitimate sport in this country, it needs to break these stereotypes first. I think one way of doing this is by returning the favor the MLB did to Australia - host a few CPL games in New York. The atmosphere of the CPL is definitely something Americans can enjoy and I think it would be the perfect opportunity to show how exciting cricket is to non-believers.

  • willsrustynuts on March 24, 2014, 22:52 GMT

    I cannot see sporting folk in the States doing anything other than laughing at a game that uses the D/L method to determine the outcome. There is more sport in tossing a coin.

  • anton1234 on March 24, 2014, 20:33 GMT

    It might be wise to focus in promoting T20 cricket to the inner city Hispanic and African-American communities in places like LA, Florida. Cricket could provide them with a better life. Thee is a large Caribbean population Florida which can be used to promote the game amongst there. As the gentleman from. America says, baseball participation amongst African-Americans is dwindling, so T20 could see this as an opportunity. I don't think Americans of European descent will take to cricket very quickly.

    Whatever is the case, the ICC should only promote T20s in all associate countries. I sometimes feel the ICC does itself no favour by muddling up these associate boards by asking them to participate in all formats.

  • Rally_Windies on March 24, 2014, 20:09 GMT

    When did cricket get LESS BORING THAN BASEBALL ?

    that is exactly when the US might get interested !

  • on March 24, 2014, 19:12 GMT

    Cricket is far more skillful and interesting game!..Some will say that baseball is more entertaining but T20 has proved to be a better show! I mean any person who has watched NZ vs SA today would know how intense the match was even though it wasn't an elimination or qualifying game. I have watched baseball and it seems to be a game where only good hitting(some wud call it batting) is given importance.. Maybe i am wrong.. but the bowling in it cud never catch attraction as a good spinner or a pacer might in cricket.. Plus..Its played between countries which wud gather far more emotions than in baseball.. Its rules may be more complicated but its a game of beauty

  • ashok16 on March 24, 2014, 18:36 GMT

    I am Indian and live in the US. I like baseball. I dont think there is even a remote chance that cricket will spread out of the expatriate communities here. Americans like their games to finish fast but they also appreciate subtlety. Mr. Chappell has missed observing this. Baseball is a beautiful game and the baseball season is addictive. Cricket has both a season problem (it is played everywhere and nowhere) and a format problem (its most beautiful format, Test matches, are tool long while the shortest format is ugly and has contrived rules - powerplays, huh?. There are a handful of Australians playing in MLB (Major League Baseball) and it is likely that more (especially pitchers) start that making that journey as the money from cricket either dwindles or becomes India centric.

  • on March 24, 2014, 18:04 GMT

    well its good to promote ckt but i think t20 leagues shud be arranged in collaboration with icc, west indies n CA so it might be helpful in promotion of ckt in us

  • i_amVIVA on March 24, 2014, 17:32 GMT

    I am an expatriate American from Bangladesh & a cricket fan. I occasionally see young people play cricket here & there in big cities, including my Washington DC. The players are exclusively from India subcontinent/ Europe. To have any hope of cricket in America, ICC needs to come out of shell of Big 10 Test teams, not to mention currently Big 3. It's to be inclusive first, of the nations where the game is already popular, thereby getting more fans here, before thought of America, or of big money. Then, the name Cricket could be in American radar, when seeds could be planted, especially in big cities like NY, LA, Chicago, Boston, Miami and Houston. It can start at college level first, or even high-schools, that's how I'd plant the seeds by investing ICC money, thru sports-scholarships, which is in big demand among students here, to select big-name schools. With patience, once it hits NCAA, - bingo, it can only go up. Thus, plan, investment & patience are key to USA Cricket; my 2 cents.

  • on March 24, 2014, 17:29 GMT

    How can I put this .... No chance.

  • Insightful2013 on March 24, 2014, 16:03 GMT

    Cricket maybe possible in the US if it is promoted right. It has to be promoted as an English game since Americans have a huge attraction to the English. Just like Rugby is now making inroads because it was promoted from college level and sexed up. Americans have to be told what to like and if it can be packaged in an English, upper class, cultural, sexy, quirky fashion, it would be possible. It can only be done from a college base. Ignorance is almost a religion to the masses and American marketers exploit this weakness to promote almost anything. The most ridiculous products are sold on late night tv, so they can be persuaded to buy anything. All comes down to the promotion. Put enough lights, noise and make it a social Anglo spectacle. Beefeaters, Coldplay or Queen sound bites, Daniel Craig with a bat, a Henley feel and look to the adverts and they'll be well sorted!

  • inswing on March 24, 2014, 13:25 GMT

    Why are they playing an MLB game in Australia? Because they want to spread baseball to other markets. There is a lot of effort from the Americans to spread baseball and american football to markets like Australia, China, and India, and England. Spreading of baseball and football outside America is far more likely than cricket spreading in the US. US can't even get their expatriate/associate cricket in order in spite of such a large immigrant pool. Forget about spreading it to local, non-immigrant Americans. Native Australians will be following and playing more baseball far before any Americans will be playing cricket.

  • TNAmarkFromIndia on March 24, 2014, 12:03 GMT

    The biggest problem is that cricket is only followed in the US by expatriates from the Indian subcontinent and countries like England, West Indies, Austalia etc. The local people really have no idea about the game and don't want to know about it either. Cricket will only become popular there if they have local players and not players of Indian, Pakistani or Sri Lankan origin.

  • py0alb on March 24, 2014, 10:34 GMT

    The first step would be to have a full 32 team world cup every four years. The US understands and likes the fifa world cup.

    As T20 is now the only really relevant version of short-format cricket for expanding the game, lets just call it "the cricket world cup" and make it clear that this is the one that really counts.

    Netherlands have shown that minor teams are perfectly capable of producing upsets and excitement so 32 teams should not be a stretch.

  • vipul4cricket on March 24, 2014, 10:18 GMT

    I think t20 could do this magic. It will definitely happen in near future. @Sir Ian Chappell, you are few of the greatest ambassadors of the game. You can make this sport more popular and spread it's popularity.

  • mohsinj on March 24, 2014, 9:47 GMT

    i am a cricket fan and i don't know anything about baseball, just like baseball fans knows nothing about cricket. but you have to admit Cricket is much harder to play and understand, but it's worth it. India vs Pakistan gather more views than any other sporting event and cricket is a much more developed sport.

  • Malvino on March 24, 2014, 9:12 GMT

    The USA will only come to cricket once they know it, and they won't come to know it unless gains recognition, and this can only be done by opening it up.

    Getting T20 into the Olympics would be fantastic for the sport (it might even end up going NCAA), but we can't join the Olympics until there are enough teams that can compete, and that won't happen until teams do compete. Why don't the ICC open the T20 world cup to 16 teams now in preparation for a genuine olympic bid. Once the product is there they could do what rugby 7s did and junk the world cup in favour of the Olympics.

  • dganger on March 24, 2014, 7:52 GMT

    @Paul rone clerck..horribly wrong information. The game was played between India and Pakistan in S/F in Mohali, Chandigarh. This match boast of one of the most highly watched sporting event Television across the globe. India played Srilanka in the fina in the 2011 WC Final @ Wankhede, Mumbai.l

  • BillyBlue on March 24, 2014, 7:13 GMT

    @ Arunvilla - u have hit the nail, right on the head buddy. Complete silly & worthless article from an increasingly delusional & irrelevant author. The only thing i would add is not just this article but the quality of writers on cricinfo is getting sillier & sillier. But that's exactly what happens when u follow the lure of the US Dollar & lose ur integrity. The pressure and need to put content up for the sake of putting it up is blatant & obvious growing at cricinfo. Any Tom, Dick or Ian can blabber whatever they please here. Its disgusting really :(

  • on March 24, 2014, 6:35 GMT

    There is one more big boy ICC could look into and that is China. There is some interest already for cricket over there and former Pakistani First Class cricketer is their National Coach. Even Javed Miandad has been involved in their development program.

  • keralite on March 24, 2014, 4:59 GMT

    ICC is not doing much for countries like Ireland, Afghanistan, Nepal who have folloqers actually interested in the game. You just need to see some pics of Aghan fans celebrating their win iver BD to see how much it matters to them. And Nepal, look at the reception the players received when they returned to Nepal. If cricket wants to grow, ICC has to maje sure fans of the game to getvto watch their team compete at highest level. Some of the other places whereI think cricket has a good following is Papua New Guinea, Scotland. Tap into the available narkets first.

  • Arunvilla on March 24, 2014, 4:51 GMT

    This article is silly.the icc cant even manage to get netherlands,ireland,scotland,italy,france,etc.,to full members and play tests and they talk about crossing atlantic.first get the europeans and the go for u.s and others.what happened to canada?

  • Nuwas on March 24, 2014, 4:50 GMT

    key to success in promoting Cricket in USA needs a sensible short term plan involving 3 years; lift cricket in China & Canada within two years accelerated plan, meanwhile host a series of T20 Cricket Carnivals (2 weeks max) involving stars of T20 arena, in cities like NY,Jersey City, California & etc where south asian population is higher, let USA, Canada & China teams participate as well, maintain a good advertising Campaign (get some known players from NFL, NBA, NLB & WWE to show up in the events) through out the seasons. Third year onwards I'm pretty damn sure, it will be a successful event in ICC calender.

  • bren19 on March 24, 2014, 3:13 GMT

    It will never happen. Americans would be forced to learn that countries like Australia, Pakistan, New Zealand and Sri Lanka actually exist.

  • AussieBogan on March 24, 2014, 2:47 GMT

    I watched bits of Arizona D'backs and LA Dodgers on Channel 9's sister channel, 'Gem'. It was great coverage from the SCG. Ian Chappell was commentating and that made it even better. I am sure the USA will take interest in Cricket soon.

  • on March 24, 2014, 2:17 GMT

    About 80% of the cricket lovers are in the South East Asia and the rest is in Aus & Eng.. Where else is Cricket popular? NZ & SA, I see more Indians / SE Asians watching Cricket games in the stadiums than natives.

    In America if a sport is not popular in the School system it will not penetrate the professional arena. As you can see with Soccer, it is still struggling to get mainstream crowd into the games. It has made some strides lately but it is mostly popular with girls / women. And similar thing may happen with cricket only immigrants playing / following cricket.

  • arefin2k on March 24, 2014, 1:57 GMT

    In my opinion, USA will never be interested into Cricket until they are motivated by some legal authority who will be able to show them that the game is too much enjoyable. Rugby and Baseball are very popular in USA. So finding out the reasons of those game's popularity, the correct initiative can be taken.

  • covadrive on March 24, 2014, 1:49 GMT

    T20 is probably the only format that stands a chance to promote cricket in America. Americans are just not use to watching games for longer hours or days. Golf is an exception because it is a game that people can generally play until in their 70's.

    If you look around the associate countries most players are expats form cricketing nations. That should be the foundation to built a team in USA as well but there needs to be proper governing body established and cricket should be promoted through community centres in various cities.

    If you look at MLS they only awarded franchises to the cities where there are lot of hispanics or Europeans live and it had worked out well. MLS has come a long away since its inception decade ago and cricket can too with similar foundation and long term vision.

    It is important to establish leagues across states and improve infrastructure and training via local community centres. Eventually this could lead to college scholarships etc.

  • Ike47 on March 24, 2014, 1:24 GMT

    Alas it's probably true that cricket, in any form, would be a 'hard sell' in the US. However, not all American cricket fans are ex-pats. I am a European American, with my most recent ancestors who were born in Europe (Ireland and Croatia) dating from the 19th century.

    The game has always fascinated me, but I never followed it because there was no way to view it here. Now that espn3 is showing lots of cricket, I can follow it, and watch every match I can. I like the Tests best, ODI middle, and T20 least, but I watch em all, and yes, I can't help but get caught up in the competition of the current WC, even though T20.

    Anyway, I'd love to see cricket develop a meaningful following here, say enough to get other countries to tour here occasionally. Of course, first we have to develop a team worthy of playing them, lol.

    As for my team(s), Go Ireland! Go Windies!

  • md4cric on March 24, 2014, 0:39 GMT

    The basic need for the beginners would be a proper groung for each interested school.Ex Pat only run the game for a few years but unless the local boys/girls at school level starts the Game will NOT take OFF.Art of bowling and Art of batting& fielding must be taught at 2 nd or 3rd grade school children and measure the interest of the participants.NO Commerce neede at the initial stage.Yes it that happens may be in next 12-15 years USA may have T20 team that should qualify for big league.

  • SportsObserver on March 24, 2014, 0:20 GMT

    This is ICC's utter failure that they could not bring USA and China in the circle, they should have been ICC's first priority. USA would have been specially easy considering it has lots of people from Cricket loving countries, USA already loves baseball, no reason for them to not like T20 even more. Once Cricket was popular in US or China, they could have helped spread cricket to other smaller countries, just like India "helps" today.

    But after the ICC revamp, we now know the true face and intentions of the ICC, those "BIG 3" would never want US or China take their place on the board. So, they will keep those giants out and "spread" cricket to smaller nations who are no threat to them and at the end of the day they can claim they brought cricket to this/that number of new nations. Cricket will never truly be global until you bring USA, Europe and China to it.

  • hammad2000 on March 23, 2014, 23:54 GMT

    I am pretty sure that the pakistanis played the canadians at ROGERS CENTRE, which is home to the mlb team TORONTO BLUE JAYS!

  • Cyber_Baba on March 23, 2014, 23:38 GMT

    It probably was a possibility couple of months ago but not any more. England, Australia, and India will oppose the idea of promoting cricket in USA.....Reason, If USA gets the full membership of ICC....There won't be big three....only Big Brother:)

  • Not_Another_Keybored_Expert on March 23, 2014, 23:13 GMT

    @SnowSnake you couldn't get rid of LBW otherwise you would just have players padding away balls all day, as for it being flawed how is it different from baseball where its the umpires interpretation of the strike zone that ultimately decides whether or not a batsman strikes out.

  • karim_s on March 23, 2014, 22:09 GMT

    I know co-workers in the U.S. who completely understand the basics of cricket ... how one scores runs, gets out, etc ... but their biggest complaint is that they have no reference point as to who is "ahead" in the game. In any other sport you can glance at the scorecard and see who's ahead --- in cricket this is not possible. An experienced fan will know that if the team batting first has scored, say, 140/3 after 30 overs, they will probably score about 270-odd which an above-average score, but a newcommer will have no idea if 140/3 is good,bad,ugly.

    If the ICC wants to globalize cricket they need to work with broadcasters and completely revamp the presentation format (on-screen graphics, commentary, etc), to make it more conducive to new-commers. This will take real leadership, and will require giving a boot to old hags like Sunny, Richie Benaud, etc ... and bringing in young professional sportscasters. In other words, as long as the ICC/BCCI exist, it will never happen.

  • on March 23, 2014, 20:41 GMT

    It's weird that no one has mentioned Canada's involvement in cricket and the growth of the sport throughout the country. In the Toronto area, there are many well recognized T20 tournaments with big sponsors, which encourage the youth to play and get involved in the sport. In 2012, I attended the T20 All Star game at the Rogers Center (Skydome) in Toronto where the baseball field of the Toronto Blue Jays was transformed into a cricket oval, similar to the transformation at the SCG. There were quite a bit of fans, as big name retired payers such as Jayasuriya, Mark Boucher, and even some current players like Tino Best, Brendan Taylor, Devon Smith entertained the crowd. In my opinion, America might only consider cricket after it becomes big in Canada.

  • on March 23, 2014, 20:28 GMT

    Let them play their own world series for cricket

  • on March 23, 2014, 20:15 GMT

    Willow showed up on my TV here in the USA and have become a fan of cricket. And, I must say I like the T20's and the ODI's over the test matches. You have action in the short matches as opposed to the chess match in the tests.

    But the USA needs venues. Baseball, football, and American football venues we have, but an oval for a cricket grounds? I don't think so.

  • OttawaRocks on March 23, 2014, 20:00 GMT

    I can see the US with a passing interest in cricket but don't see it beyond that. To get to the level of where US soccer is currently will require 50 years of development IMO. The US has had a tradition of spectator interest in both soccer (1970s) and ice hockey (early 1900s) and even with that advantage both sports languish far behind the traditional big 3 sports in the US (basketball, baseball and football). However, I consider both sports to be successful with established carved out niches. Cricket has long way to go before they can get there. The first step will be to develop a small North American league that capitalizes on immigrant population spectator interest while being boosted by ICC sanctioned tourneys where top tier teams visit from time to time. The second step will be to develop good native players that can become the core of a national team that is competitive with the tier 1 teams. Lots of work needs to be done.

  • on March 23, 2014, 19:37 GMT

    It is worth reading about cricket that used to be played in Philadelphia in the 1920s - it was regarded as first class standard and they even beat Australia a few times. It was a shame the then ruling body, Imperial Cricket Council, specifically excluded any non British Empire countries.

  • Maikolachi on March 23, 2014, 19:26 GMT

    The only way the US will be interested if stupid rules from T20 are removed. Like the DLL. The first team plays thinking of 20 overs and by the time the second team bats, they can just hit it out knowing that it will be stopped. Only in cricket, such dumbness can be tolerated.

  • criclover112 on March 23, 2014, 19:20 GMT

    Why would they take to T20 cricket? They already have baseball, which is entrenched in American culture and history.

  • on March 23, 2014, 19:11 GMT

    This question might have been relevant once. When the US represented a path to globalization and more cash in the game. With India now a far more affluent country and with a population 4x the size of the US - and with China (even larger population, less affluent) showing real interest, then as far as globalizing and monetizing the game goes.. the USA is a side show at best.

    I love baseball (An A's fan. Will this be Coco's last year? Will Cespedes be a little more selective with his swings. Is Sonny Grey as good as his minor stats and superb pitching action suggest he might be?) But they are two different games probably vying for the same "bat 'n' ball" market. Baseball is the game in the USA.

    The largest live audience for a televised sports event EVER was the semi final between Sri Lanka and India 2nd April 2011 at Wankhede stadium. 1.1 BILLION. Some 8x greater than watched the Superbowl in 2014.

    US sports are not even close. Not close by a country mile.

  • sreehk on March 23, 2014, 18:54 GMT

    ICC has not made any genuine attempts to grow the game of Cricket beyond 10 countries. Instead of blaming and cribbing over cash rich BCCI, ICC should focus on developing new markets like USA, Canada, and China thus balancing the power circles. Though initially expats make the US team, it would gain traction over a period of time which is what we call as evolution, from long term standpoint. Cricket is methodical game blending mental and physical prowess unlike the baseball's wild throwing arm and wood swinging. So, if ICC can get even a couple of states to watch cricket it would definitely keep the audience hooked. However the only thing that can come in the way is US's adamant thinking of do opposite to whatever rest of world does. For ex, football to rest of World means kick the ball by foot, but for US it means throw the ball by hand, as if to deliberately mock the original football saying 'we hold the ball by hand, so what and why foul'. US should shun this old school thinking.

  • on March 23, 2014, 18:53 GMT

    A real maverick like a Lalit Mohdi,Abdul Bhamjee (ex S.A soccer) or Dana White (UFC) type of administrator is needed...someone who ruffles feathers and aggressively sells the game.There are many Indian,Pakistani,West Indian people,etc livING in the USA,so some form of support can be expected.Americans have a deep dislike almost for cricket generally so its a tough nut to crack.

  • KrazyToes on March 23, 2014, 18:48 GMT

    I was thinking the same thing yesterday after reading that MLB opened its regular season at the SCG. We should first start off with hosting some premier IPL in the USA (like what the MLB did). I am sure a Chennai SuperKings vs Mumbai Indians game will sell out the Yankee Stadium or Dodgers Stadium. Then, we can introduce some marquee international matchups like India/Pak, Australia/England T20 games (like a best of 3 series played Friday/Saturday/Sunday nights) in the USA. Also, its important to schedule these when there is less competition around - like just before the MLB Season begins or during the All-Star-break of the MLB season.

  • Chris_P on March 23, 2014, 18:46 GMT

    As much as I would love to see it happening, the simple facts are that it is not going to happen in the US. They are far too into their own sports, it is ingrown within their culture. You may get pockets of interest but the facts are there. Soccer has tried to get a foothold there, & millions has been poured in to crack the market, & while there is some success, nationally it isn't a big deal. I was living in the US when Rugby League held a couple of games there to ascertain interest. Here was a game played without helmets, without pads, the hits were just as huge, no stoppages in 80 minutes with action ongoing measured against the slow paced, boring (IMHO) lengthy gridiron. It seemed natural that it would work, right? Nope, didn't fit with tier culture, their history. Cricket should concentrate on other markets, this is really a no win going there.

  • jackiethepen on March 23, 2014, 18:40 GMT

    There is absolutely no reason for Americans to be interested in a version of cricket which is like baseball. They have baseball, they don't need t20. What they don't have is a game that lasts one day or five days for that matter. Nor a game that has the intricate set of skills needed by cricket. If you gets the sports players interested in cricket because it is more challenging then maybe you will have cricket in America. You don't go to target the audience. You target the sportspeople. The audience will follow. That is how it happens naturally.

  • on March 23, 2014, 18:34 GMT

    Cricket will never take place of baseball in USA, baseball is their past time and living in US I can tell you outside of the Ex-pat community Americans have very limited understanding of cricket and find it to be very tedious. T20 will not change that.

  • CJ_R on March 23, 2014, 18:31 GMT

    Make T20 cricket an Olympic sport and i assure you America will take keen interest.

  • llw5682 on March 23, 2014, 18:20 GMT

    Why is this still up for discussion?? Americans know about cricket. There's enough of us either living there or passing through explaining and showing them what the game is and have been doing so for quite some time. They're not interested and they never will be. They have enough major sports to keep the population occupied. The goal is to grow the game which means all formats of the game; otherwise it just seems as if you're exploiting other nations for their money.

  • on March 23, 2014, 17:30 GMT

    Why are we so bent over backwards for Americans to like Cricket? They have their sports and cricket is never going to be a main stream sport. They have NFL. College Football, NBA, College Basketball, NASCAR, MLB, MLS, NHL, Boxing, MMA, etc etc. You think they want to follow this English game called cricket? A lot of mainstream broadcasters don't know absolutely nothing about cricket and that is because they don't have to know anything about it because nobody cares.

  • on March 23, 2014, 17:27 GMT

    The USA is so 20 century. China is where cricket should be putting all its effort into getting the game going.

  • on March 23, 2014, 16:27 GMT

    Well.. it could. I was going to say no chance, not in a million years because Americans stick to what they know best and the comparisons with their beloved baseball would start and simply never end once if T20 is to be introduced. On the other hand, take a look at MMA; Americans knew nothing about Jiu-Jitsu but their wrestling background let them at least give it a shot and now the US has taken over the mixed martial arts world; using this logic some good baseball hitters might fancy their chances in cricket - but the US wouldn't want to get involved unless they can run the show. Simple as that.

  • John-Price on March 23, 2014, 16:20 GMT

    US only likes team games when they win; this means that they don't take to games which are well established in other countries. US cricket will remain the preserve of ex-pats.

  • on March 23, 2014, 16:04 GMT

    Never!!!! Can't imagine Americans in a Cricket stadium.

  • on March 23, 2014, 15:54 GMT

    Effort is better concentrated in China and start in the grass roots levels. The problem with the effort to globalise cricket is that its nothing more than a bunch of expats playing for said country.

  • HaveALookatThat on March 23, 2014, 15:44 GMT

    Without question the format with the only chance of catching America's fancy, if at all. I think baseballs fans could be the ones that might take to the game first. Wonderful article written by Jeff Tucker on espncricinfo's pages called 'Cricket explained (An American viewpoint) uses baseball to compare and contrast at every step. I've used that to convert a couple of American friends into fans (one actually became a bigger fan of Test cricket than the short forms even!). Perhaps the ICC/US cricket administrators could take some ideas from that and expand on them. And even us crazy cricket fans. Get your friends to watch and play.

  • SnowSnake on March 23, 2014, 15:27 GMT

    No is the simple answer. America never gets interested in any game where International Committee is incharge. US plays soccer but most people don't really care as much for soccer here. Cricket is a flawed game to get Americans interested anyway. Get rid of LBWs and then it may stand a chance.

  • flickspin on March 23, 2014, 15:14 GMT

    i would love to see America and China playing cricket, most aussies abroad click on Australian news sights to keep in touch with Australian sport.

    the icc should target american universities and colleges and set up 20/20 comps to be played at universities. they can play against each other.

    baseballers who carnt make the university and college teams can play cricket, you could divide the comp like the nba basketball and have divisions like the south pacific division(california oregon,arizonia,utah), the south central division (texas,oklahom,kansas) north central division (illinois,wisconsin,indiana,michagan) south atlantic division (florida,alabama,tennessee ,carolina,georgia) and the north atlantic division (virginia,pennsylvania, new york, new england, massachusats,maine,baltimore)

    each team only plays against teams in its division

    having divisions cuts down on travel cost,

    the 2 top teams of each division go to the play offs and play each other to decide who the final winner

  • bzzd on March 23, 2014, 14:59 GMT

    The trouble with this argument is that T20 is a very debased form of cricket and baseball is actually a better game than T20

  • on March 23, 2014, 14:55 GMT

    It would be great if the US machine could get behind cricket but the short-sightedness of the ICC will put pay to most of the idea of expanding the game beyond the current crop of nations that actually play the game now. Test cricket will stay a closed shop until the ICC need a new nation like the USA or China for financial purposes. Watch the US or China get a Test team before Ireland or Afghanistan.

  • DwightR on March 23, 2014, 14:54 GMT

    T20 is the medium to take cricket to America, I can see it becoming like MLS but its an old story by now...it'll never happen as long as USACA is the administrator for the sport.

  • BruceBaskin on March 23, 2014, 14:46 GMT

    T20 is probably the only form of the sport that will get Americans interested in cricket (even though we Yanks will sit through four days of golf and not be "bored"...go figure), but the problem in the USA isn't with cricket itself. The problem is the insular, navel-gazing stewardship of USACA and so many of the local cricket organizations. There is no real effort to even invite Americans to watch and learn the game. We have to seek and find it with no help, which means first knowing where to look. In the end, cricket is little more in this country beyond an expat social club on summer weekends.

    I only hope the ACF does well enough that the ICC turns away from USACA and gives oversight of cricket in the USA to an organization that actually wants to build it up here, but that only scratches the surface. The LOCAL players have to want to grow it, too, and I see precious little evidence of that.

  • visn on March 23, 2014, 14:42 GMT

    Football, Rugby, Formula 1, Cricket, Hockey (in the mostly commonwealth territories)

    Gridiron, Basketball, Indy Car, Baseball, Ice Hockey - Hollywood sell hardly managed to capture much, only small pockets of youth who are more into the culture than their sports.

    There is some intersection with some countries in the rest of the world, but not enough intersection with enough countries. In the US soccer is huge but also it is not, really.

    T20 - no, not really.

  • on March 23, 2014, 14:31 GMT

    To really have cricket "take" in the USA and in all reality survive around the world, T20 is the only viable economic option. You will never get youth or their parents involved in anything more or longer than 3 hours. The same goes for advertising dollars on TV. The great forms of cricket are for an era that will no longer support the 50 over or any longer format for 10 more years. Innovation and the 3 hour format are the only options for the Brave New World of a great sport. The other reality re US cricket is that it will need to be played on artificial pitches. No matter how hard good people are working to create some decent turf wickets, the cost of stadiums for fans to attend is too much. Play in stadiums like they did din Toronto where 50,000 people watched a match with India v ROW and you might have a plan.

  • Puffin on March 23, 2014, 14:18 GMT

    It's probably a waste of time, and it's also possibly unwise to try. We don't want the essentials of cricket messed around to suit a different audience any more than they are already. China would be better.

  • Batmanian on March 23, 2014, 13:48 GMT

    @cheguramana: 'combining the best aspects of West Indies and Australia at their respective peaks' - I presume you're trying to make a point about ethnic mix? I'm afraid subcontinental immigrants and their sons are not only the core reality for US cricket, they're probably the most viable pathway for the sport to reach some modest critical mass.

  • cheguramana on March 23, 2014, 12:30 GMT

    It will be fantastic to have USA as a major player in world cricket ! Imagine a Test team developing there- it cud become a giant of cricket, combining the best aspects of West Indies and Australia at their respective peaks!!

  • eggyroe on March 23, 2014, 12:20 GMT

    In England,Baseball is called rounders and it is played by girls.America when it comes to sport is so insular that they seem to think that all sport was invented in America,and when it is proved that a game was invented somewhere else they instantly turn off.

  • Insightful2013 on March 23, 2014, 12:06 GMT

    Cricket won't catch on because it doesn't have that ' je ne sais quoi'. Soccer succeeded because it was viewed as a European thing and came with a certain Joie de vivre. Americans, need the pomp, the cheering, the Europeanness. Despite what they say, they view Europeans as having a superior culture. Americans are somewhat xenophobic and Europeans aren't considered as too different. Movies and telly are the prime source of education and until lesser nations are hyped or included, they aren't even considered. I work mostly amongst post grads and you would be surprised at how limited their interest or education are re other countries. Senators, congressmen and Presidents are equally as bad. They have no interest in others, unless it's a current fad that's being promoted. Information has to be sanitised and Americanised. Ethnic communities have isolated regions in the cities and little mixing occurs. Only the truly educated are interested and then it's an Anglophiled interest. Good Luck!

  • on March 23, 2014, 11:20 GMT

    Agree with the 'No' vote here. The beauty of cricket is that it's not played by most of the traditional sporting powerhouses (Germany, Russia, US, now China). And that's what makes it so special

  • on March 23, 2014, 10:52 GMT

    Although the "Home" of baseball is the US, the sport, and the name, was invented in England. :D

  • on March 23, 2014, 10:50 GMT

    ohhh please we are back to USA again....cricket has no future there...better investment in emerging nations like Nepal and Afghanistan or bigger markets like China

  • on March 23, 2014, 10:37 GMT

    @Ali Eorse ... Asia XI vs Australia in India ... How awesome it could be?

  • yoadie on March 23, 2014, 10:24 GMT

    Stage a World Twenty20 tournament on the eastern shore-board of the US and Canada, using venues in Toronto, Boston, New York, Detroit, Atlanta, and Fort Lauderdale. That should kick-start things.

  • on March 23, 2014, 10:05 GMT

    Ian: can you help to organize AUS vs Rest of the World TEST match starting this Boxing Day in AUS? I want to see AUS win and Johnson be the MOM.

  • smudgeon on March 23, 2014, 9:12 GMT

    I went to a baseball match at the Tokyo Dome a couple of years ago. Local derby. Worst three hours of my trip to Japan, I found the crowd MUCH more interesting than the game (if you've been to a game in Japan, you'll understand why). I'm sure baseball fans probably feel the same about cricket, by and large. It's a tough market to crack (the USA, competing against baseball), and in no small part due to that word Ian mentions first up: "Tradition". I'd rather see the money being aimed at entering the US market redirected to developing the top associates who are already keen on playing the game...but then, I'm not a business guy, am I? ;) USA (and China) are really the holy grails of cricket, I feel. Pity neither country is really interested in the game, and it'll take a LONG time and a lot of investment to change that...

  • Vijay_P_S on March 23, 2014, 9:02 GMT

    Cricket has everything that baseball has and a lot more. In other words baseball is a subset of cricket.

  • on March 23, 2014, 8:29 GMT

    With fast growing population of Indians, Pakistanis, Bdeshis, Slankans in USA, It has to be a natural market for cricket in future.

  • on March 23, 2014, 8:09 GMT

    Went to the baseball today for the first time. Was AWESOME. A converted fan.

  • on March 23, 2014, 8:07 GMT

    T20 Cricket is more interesting and thrilling than boring base ball. . ICC needs to promote T20 into US. . They will surely like it.

  • ilovetests on March 23, 2014, 8:06 GMT

    You wrote: "So while India and Pakistan continue their rivalry and other heavyweights like Australia, England, West Indies, Sri Lanka and South Africa join in the fight for the silverware..."

    Chappelli, I see you missed one heavyweight out. You never fail to patronise, insult or ignore the Kiwis. I know you've had a chip on your shoulder about NZ ever since Turner and co beat your lads back in the 70s, but that was 40 years ago. Time to move on; it will be therapeutic.

  • on March 23, 2014, 8:03 GMT

    By all means, promote the game as much as possible in the USA, but please do not do it at the cost of further promotion throughout Asia. This is where the strength and future of cricket lies. The likes of Hong Kong and the UAE are still a little way short of being consistent teams but the likes of Nepal and Afghanistan can become the next Sri Lanka or Bangladesh, it's very clear that the player base and passion is there. If cricket is to throw some dollars at expansion it must be in Asia.

  • on March 23, 2014, 7:55 GMT

    Cricket Australia should have some cricket action @ Yankee stadium cuz the way Baseball just had wonderful action at SCG

  • Alexk400 on March 23, 2014, 7:42 GMT

    T20 100 times better than SNOOZEFEST baseball. Baseball probably watchable when there is 90mph pitcher on the mound. Or closer during playoff. To play cricket you have to be cunning and strong. baseball you can whack it if you are strong physically. Cricket you need to have more skill than baseball. To be a hit in USA you have to simplify the game. People are simple minded. Lots people do not even know India exist. T20 can be super hit if rules are simplified.

  • Harlequin. on March 23, 2014, 7:24 GMT

    Haven't we had this idea for years. And hasn't the conclusion always been a resounding 'no'. What has changed this time?

  • on March 23, 2014, 5:31 GMT

    baseball is extremely famous in US. It is very hard to promote cricket in US because they already has Baseball which is like T2020 cricket. Also Americans do not like British made sports. So it will be hard. If ICC plans for next 50 years and play the cards right then may be after 50 years of effort some how they can change american mind set and promote cricket.

    Also American do not like to compete at international level. American call all their local leagues world championship so how come we expect Americans to accept international cricket. It is very hard.

    I think ICC should rather try to promote cricket in China rather than USA.

  • dganger on March 23, 2014, 5:30 GMT

    Its important to develop the game in other parts of the world but ICC should be cautious about the fact that it should catch the attention of the main stream people , the native American. Thr is no point fielding a team comprising of mainly Asians, carribian, Aussies etc. Otherwise it becomes a joke in the name of national team. Remember what Ricky pointing mentioned during 2003 WC match against USA. He made it very clear that he would love to see native Americans. Good thing is teams like Ireland, Netherland Afganisthan not only fielding native players but also cricket slowly and steadily catching attention in thr respective countries. But not the same case with Hongkong

  • on March 23, 2014, 5:17 GMT

    LBW & Wide rule change will encourage a slew of new stratergy, Batting coaching, leg side stroke play, versatile inswing, & ofcourse some sweet sensational leg side stumping, my favourite... then lets introduce the T20 to the world again.. games on!!!

  • on March 23, 2014, 5:02 GMT

    The LBW & Wide rule change in all formats as discussed above by RM too, forces Batting coaching to Juniors a whole more meaningful & versatile.

  • on March 23, 2014, 4:52 GMT

    This is the best that could happen to cricket. bring T20 to the USA North America & insert Canada too. however Talking about rules. this needs an upgrade the LBW and the wide rule is redundant I feel.. hear me out.. When can the discrimination of a leg spinner having pitched outside the Leg stump and be given LBW when the interception is within the Stumps. Whats so special about the off side ? I believe that this rule has to be updated. The LBW our side the Leg stump to be yet active, and also some Bowling on the legs side. Why are we playing cricket on one side. Leg side stroke play and bowling must be encouraged, make this game less dominant to the batters. Thanks for considering... Coach Phil

  • on March 23, 2014, 4:23 GMT

    Actually T20 cricket guarantees more action than soccer, which too however is not very popular in USA. It's not a game's excitement potential that endears it to masses, otherwise soccer outdoing cricket the way it does is hardly understandable.

  • NALINWIJ on March 23, 2014, 4:06 GMT

    not a bad idea if T20 could be sold to them then some American"s with longer concentration spans and desire for higher levels of tactics may get interested in longer formats of the game.

  • on March 23, 2014, 3:43 GMT

    As per history goes cricket was once popular in America(around civil war i guess)..later baseball evolved as a simplified form and took over..this suggests that they have gone through the experimentation already..

  • on March 23, 2014, 3:28 GMT

    perhaps you could simplify the rules for t20 a bit, in a way that also provides a bit more balance between bat and ball. im thinking of the lbw law, perhaps allowing the ball to pitch outside leg. this would clarify the concept of lbw to newcomers as simply a rule that penalises the body from protecting the stumps, rather than confusing them with all the current exceptions. it would also benefit the bowler in a batting-focused format of the game

  • on March 23, 2014, 3:28 GMT

    perhaps you could simplify the rules for t20 a bit, in a way that also provides a bit more balance between bat and ball. im thinking of the lbw law, perhaps allowing the ball to pitch outside leg. this would clarify the concept of lbw to newcomers as simply a rule that penalises the body from protecting the stumps, rather than confusing them with all the current exceptions. it would also benefit the bowler in a batting-focused format of the game

  • on March 23, 2014, 3:43 GMT

    As per history goes cricket was once popular in America(around civil war i guess)..later baseball evolved as a simplified form and took over..this suggests that they have gone through the experimentation already..

  • NALINWIJ on March 23, 2014, 4:06 GMT

    not a bad idea if T20 could be sold to them then some American"s with longer concentration spans and desire for higher levels of tactics may get interested in longer formats of the game.

  • on March 23, 2014, 4:23 GMT

    Actually T20 cricket guarantees more action than soccer, which too however is not very popular in USA. It's not a game's excitement potential that endears it to masses, otherwise soccer outdoing cricket the way it does is hardly understandable.

  • on March 23, 2014, 4:52 GMT

    This is the best that could happen to cricket. bring T20 to the USA North America & insert Canada too. however Talking about rules. this needs an upgrade the LBW and the wide rule is redundant I feel.. hear me out.. When can the discrimination of a leg spinner having pitched outside the Leg stump and be given LBW when the interception is within the Stumps. Whats so special about the off side ? I believe that this rule has to be updated. The LBW our side the Leg stump to be yet active, and also some Bowling on the legs side. Why are we playing cricket on one side. Leg side stroke play and bowling must be encouraged, make this game less dominant to the batters. Thanks for considering... Coach Phil

  • on March 23, 2014, 5:02 GMT

    The LBW & Wide rule change in all formats as discussed above by RM too, forces Batting coaching to Juniors a whole more meaningful & versatile.

  • on March 23, 2014, 5:17 GMT

    LBW & Wide rule change will encourage a slew of new stratergy, Batting coaching, leg side stroke play, versatile inswing, & ofcourse some sweet sensational leg side stumping, my favourite... then lets introduce the T20 to the world again.. games on!!!

  • dganger on March 23, 2014, 5:30 GMT

    Its important to develop the game in other parts of the world but ICC should be cautious about the fact that it should catch the attention of the main stream people , the native American. Thr is no point fielding a team comprising of mainly Asians, carribian, Aussies etc. Otherwise it becomes a joke in the name of national team. Remember what Ricky pointing mentioned during 2003 WC match against USA. He made it very clear that he would love to see native Americans. Good thing is teams like Ireland, Netherland Afganisthan not only fielding native players but also cricket slowly and steadily catching attention in thr respective countries. But not the same case with Hongkong

  • on March 23, 2014, 5:31 GMT

    baseball is extremely famous in US. It is very hard to promote cricket in US because they already has Baseball which is like T2020 cricket. Also Americans do not like British made sports. So it will be hard. If ICC plans for next 50 years and play the cards right then may be after 50 years of effort some how they can change american mind set and promote cricket.

    Also American do not like to compete at international level. American call all their local leagues world championship so how come we expect Americans to accept international cricket. It is very hard.

    I think ICC should rather try to promote cricket in China rather than USA.

  • Harlequin. on March 23, 2014, 7:24 GMT

    Haven't we had this idea for years. And hasn't the conclusion always been a resounding 'no'. What has changed this time?