USA News August 28, 2013

'USA should revoke membership of ICC'

58

Frustrated with the lack of progress in the development of cricket in the United States of America, the head of the nation's youth cricket association has called on the country to relinquish its membership of the ICC.

Despite having been an been an associate member of the ICC since 1965, cricket remains a minority sport in the USA, with fewer than 10 grass pitches and only three of the current national side born in the country.

USA's membership has twice been suspended from the ICC and plans for a high-profile T20 league have never progressed beyond discussions. USA are currently in Division Three of the World Cricket League and USA Cricket Association, the official board, are believed to be US$2 million in debt and mired in controversy after highly criticised internal elections.

Now Jamie Harrison, president of the volunteer organisation USA Youth Cricket Association has called for change. While Harrison is loathe to turn his back on the funding provided by the ICC - currently around $300,000 per year - he is among those to have lost faith in the USA Cricket Association, the official board, who have, he says, "proven itself incapable of establishing cricket as an American sport".

According to Harrison, if the ICC is unwilling or unable to see that USACA are part of the problem rather than part of the solution, the country would be better off without their involvement.

"After nearly fifty years of Associate membership of the ICC, cricket in the United States still languishes as a niche sport for expatriates," Harrison told ESPNcricinfo. "The national governing body has proven itself incapable of establishing cricket as an American sport and the world governing body sees America's value solely in terms of the commercial prospects of its expatriate fan base.

"Ample evidence exists to support the conviction that the United States has evolved into little more than a dysfunctional cricket colony, forever doomed to the backwaters of the international game, unless a new path is chosen.

"It is clear to me that the time for this new path has come, and that for the immediate future, that path must shun ICC entanglements. Only by shedding its international rewards and responsibilities can America free itself from those in its current cricket administration, find true visionaries for its leadership, and turn its ample resources toward building a domestic game.

"Rather than prop up a dysfunctional, unpopular body saddled with crushing debt that cannot act in the best interests of American cricket, the ICC should do the right thing and let us begin again, and if the ICC won't get on the right side of the debate, then the USA should just do it without them.

"The time has come for change. No longer is out-of-touch administrators smugly dictating to American volunteers an acceptable state of affairs."

"The time has come for change. No longer is the status quo, where out-of-touch administrators smugly dictate to American volunteers, an acceptable state of affairs. We believe that a fresh start, a start controlled from the grassroots by those doing the hard work of building the game, is required."

One of the fundamental problems, in Harrison's view, is the link between ICC funding and the success of the national side. It has, he claims, led to short-termism both in regards team selection and development funding with administrators chasing immediate gains and the expat market, to the exclusion of youth development and engagement.

He hopes that, in time, the ICC will embrace the American Cricket Federation as a viable alternative to USACA.

"The ACF is a relatively new national organisation that has attracted some of the best cricket administrators in the country to its ranks," Harrison explained. "Its constitution and governance structure is superior to USACA and they go to great lengths to give representation to all cricket stakeholders. More to the point, its leadership is motivated by altruism, not ego-inflating ICC baubles."

The USYCA was formed by Harrison in 2010 with the intention of making a more vigorous effort to grow the game in the US, and claims to have reached around 250,000 school students, though that figure is disputed by the ICC. The association has distributed more than 1,500 cricket sets to schools across the country. But Harrison said he had found his efforts to push the game at the grassroots level had not corresponded to the way he feels the ICC sees the US - primarily as an extra marketplace for the current Full Member countries.

Tim Anderson, global development manager at the ICC, accepted the development of US cricket had been "challenging" but insisted that USACA was now putting in place the changes required to progress.

"It's important to acknowledge the history of cricket in the USA," Anderson told ESPNcricinfo. "The majority of cricket played in the USA is by people of Caribbean or south Asian backgrounds, and limited progress has so far been made in taking the game to the wider population. USACA has also faced governance and administration challenges in the past that saw it twice suspended by the ICC for failing to meet membership criteria.

"But that approach wasn't effective and therefore a closer working relationship has now been established. To the USACA Board's credit, it has recognised that change is needed for the game to move forward more purposefully, and over the past year this has led to the appointment of a new CEO, the implementation of an independent governance review and the development of a new strategy and staffing structure that has a focus on both improving performance and growing participation.

"We admire the work of USYCA and other youth development organisations across the USA that are promoting cricket to the youth of America. Their work supports USACA's national development mandate and will hopefully assist in the long term realisation of cricket's vast potential in the USA."

Darren Beazley, who became chief executive of USACA in February, admitted the long-term history of his organisation was "chequered", but felt the short-term results promised far more.

"I can't deny there have been problems in the past," he told ESPNcricinfo. "But we're heading in the right direction now. We've made real progress in the last six months and I hope, in time, we can persuade Jamie Harrison to work with us."

George Dobell is a senior correspondent at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • on August 29, 2013, 6:41 GMT

    I play for NTCA here in Dallas, TX---300k a year ha? Where are they going? Need that money go to universities with cricket loving populations and it will catch on. UNIVERSITIES---not LEAGUES or (first class). It needs to start with schools.. give them the money to start a program. You have millions of South Asians, Caribbean, etc that will help Pay for their child to play cricket at their SCHOOLS! C'mon man... we have Shoaib Akhtar, Kamran Akmal, and West Indian players playing in Dallas T20 tournament this weekend... guess what? It's not on cricinfo, not on willow nor youtube,,.. we are doing everything here because we love the game... we don't get paid to do this. Cannot do it alone here.

  • ImpartialExpert on August 29, 2013, 2:57 GMT

    The US public is generally not into global team sports. Rugby vs American football for example. They are more into their own version of sports and their own leagues. It has to at least start from there and if they can compete at global level then they may show interest. So ICC really should not spend any more money on the US cricket facilities. Eventually they will come up their version/format of cricket that they will play in their domestic leagues and bask in the glory of being world champions in a sport only they play

  • on August 28, 2013, 14:24 GMT

    I grew up watching and playing baseball, I've spent most of my life in St. Louis, MO home the 11 time champion Cardinals. My love of baseball is deep, it is a huge part of the community in which I live. That being said, I was turned on to cricket about a decade ago by a visiting Englishman, but it was only a few years ago that I actually had a decent chance to begin watching cricket thanks to the willow network. It is difficult game to explain to an American who has no basis of comparison, and who to a man, will immediately say "but doesn't it take a week to play a game" when they find out I like to watch cricket as much as baseball these days. I've yet to meet another American (who's not an expat) who is really even ready to give it a chance.

    I'm not convinced at all that baseball is more technical or tactical than cricket, but that may have a lot to do with having grown up watching baseball I usually understand exactly what's going on during the game. Cricket not so much

  • WCC-USA on August 31, 2013, 17:15 GMT

    My comments are addressed to the author primarily. Please understand that Jamie Harrison's Organization primarily focuses on tennis ball and hard tennis ball cricket. Therefore when you try to project him as "the" voice in youth cricket you are ignoring many other organizations that focus on youth playing genuine hard ball cricket and spend their time and resources to improve Cricket.Yes, the USA record in youth cricket is deplorable. That has to do with a lack of structure in youth cricket and the vested interests in current cricketing circles none of which USACA is "arrogantly" refusing to address. Revoking ICC membership is not the solution. Revoke USACA's exclusive rights to cricket in the USA. Confer those rights to one or two other organizations so that it fosters competition to promote cricket here. Until that happens you will be pouring money into (I do not want to go there.........)

  • on August 30, 2013, 18:28 GMT

    So how is cricket funded exactly in the United States? Through private individuals and corporations? How can U.S. cricket get more funding?

  • on August 30, 2013, 9:39 GMT

    @Krishnan - If you've never heard of USYCA, and you are now surprised to hear about the 250,000 children they've introduced to cricket, then you must not be that involved in cricket in America. Wake up. Seriously!

  • on August 30, 2013, 5:01 GMT

    Disappointing article. While we are here at Cricket Zeal Academy toiling away in California building up Youth Cricket across 4 cities here in Silicon Valley, some random article appears and shows no respect whatsoever to grass root folks such as us. It is for the first time I heard that there is an organization called USYCA! And they've trained, wait a minute, how many kids now? 250,000? Did ESPN check whether the bats were flat or rounded? 250,000 kids! Deserves a recheck, I suppose!

  • HateFixing on August 29, 2013, 16:54 GMT

    Here in USA teams play each other and they say we are world champion though there is not a single international team or player.huh... Also they don't want to promote cricket here becuase they are affraid of cricket popularity and it will harm there own created boring game - Basball.

  • chechong0114 on August 29, 2013, 16:27 GMT

    The USA is lite years ahead of the ICC and the sport of cricket as a whole. And they are right when they say that all the decision making takes too long especially when it comes to serious progression, just proves me right when I say that cricket is full of too much bureaucracy and very little vision when it comes to development, no wonder the USA is in debt of $2 million the ICC needs a serious overhaul SEEEEERIOUSLY!!!! They need to be overthrown and all those old grey headed men need to be removed and replaced with young enterprising blood and that has to be done soon to save this great and wonderful sport.

  • on August 29, 2013, 15:44 GMT

    I think the problem here is that instead of trying to develop a sport, they are trying to develop a market. Their focus is too much on the money part of it and not that much on building the game itself. You will have to focus on funding schools and colleges here to introduce Cricket then we ll get somewhere. You want locals and main market to play the sport. Instead of focussing on big market and thinking about how to make money, lets think about how to develop the sport and take it to mainstream America.

  • on August 29, 2013, 6:41 GMT

    I play for NTCA here in Dallas, TX---300k a year ha? Where are they going? Need that money go to universities with cricket loving populations and it will catch on. UNIVERSITIES---not LEAGUES or (first class). It needs to start with schools.. give them the money to start a program. You have millions of South Asians, Caribbean, etc that will help Pay for their child to play cricket at their SCHOOLS! C'mon man... we have Shoaib Akhtar, Kamran Akmal, and West Indian players playing in Dallas T20 tournament this weekend... guess what? It's not on cricinfo, not on willow nor youtube,,.. we are doing everything here because we love the game... we don't get paid to do this. Cannot do it alone here.

  • ImpartialExpert on August 29, 2013, 2:57 GMT

    The US public is generally not into global team sports. Rugby vs American football for example. They are more into their own version of sports and their own leagues. It has to at least start from there and if they can compete at global level then they may show interest. So ICC really should not spend any more money on the US cricket facilities. Eventually they will come up their version/format of cricket that they will play in their domestic leagues and bask in the glory of being world champions in a sport only they play

  • on August 28, 2013, 14:24 GMT

    I grew up watching and playing baseball, I've spent most of my life in St. Louis, MO home the 11 time champion Cardinals. My love of baseball is deep, it is a huge part of the community in which I live. That being said, I was turned on to cricket about a decade ago by a visiting Englishman, but it was only a few years ago that I actually had a decent chance to begin watching cricket thanks to the willow network. It is difficult game to explain to an American who has no basis of comparison, and who to a man, will immediately say "but doesn't it take a week to play a game" when they find out I like to watch cricket as much as baseball these days. I've yet to meet another American (who's not an expat) who is really even ready to give it a chance.

    I'm not convinced at all that baseball is more technical or tactical than cricket, but that may have a lot to do with having grown up watching baseball I usually understand exactly what's going on during the game. Cricket not so much

  • WCC-USA on August 31, 2013, 17:15 GMT

    My comments are addressed to the author primarily. Please understand that Jamie Harrison's Organization primarily focuses on tennis ball and hard tennis ball cricket. Therefore when you try to project him as "the" voice in youth cricket you are ignoring many other organizations that focus on youth playing genuine hard ball cricket and spend their time and resources to improve Cricket.Yes, the USA record in youth cricket is deplorable. That has to do with a lack of structure in youth cricket and the vested interests in current cricketing circles none of which USACA is "arrogantly" refusing to address. Revoking ICC membership is not the solution. Revoke USACA's exclusive rights to cricket in the USA. Confer those rights to one or two other organizations so that it fosters competition to promote cricket here. Until that happens you will be pouring money into (I do not want to go there.........)

  • on August 30, 2013, 18:28 GMT

    So how is cricket funded exactly in the United States? Through private individuals and corporations? How can U.S. cricket get more funding?

  • on August 30, 2013, 9:39 GMT

    @Krishnan - If you've never heard of USYCA, and you are now surprised to hear about the 250,000 children they've introduced to cricket, then you must not be that involved in cricket in America. Wake up. Seriously!

  • on August 30, 2013, 5:01 GMT

    Disappointing article. While we are here at Cricket Zeal Academy toiling away in California building up Youth Cricket across 4 cities here in Silicon Valley, some random article appears and shows no respect whatsoever to grass root folks such as us. It is for the first time I heard that there is an organization called USYCA! And they've trained, wait a minute, how many kids now? 250,000? Did ESPN check whether the bats were flat or rounded? 250,000 kids! Deserves a recheck, I suppose!

  • HateFixing on August 29, 2013, 16:54 GMT

    Here in USA teams play each other and they say we are world champion though there is not a single international team or player.huh... Also they don't want to promote cricket here becuase they are affraid of cricket popularity and it will harm there own created boring game - Basball.

  • chechong0114 on August 29, 2013, 16:27 GMT

    The USA is lite years ahead of the ICC and the sport of cricket as a whole. And they are right when they say that all the decision making takes too long especially when it comes to serious progression, just proves me right when I say that cricket is full of too much bureaucracy and very little vision when it comes to development, no wonder the USA is in debt of $2 million the ICC needs a serious overhaul SEEEEERIOUSLY!!!! They need to be overthrown and all those old grey headed men need to be removed and replaced with young enterprising blood and that has to be done soon to save this great and wonderful sport.

  • on August 29, 2013, 15:44 GMT

    I think the problem here is that instead of trying to develop a sport, they are trying to develop a market. Their focus is too much on the money part of it and not that much on building the game itself. You will have to focus on funding schools and colleges here to introduce Cricket then we ll get somewhere. You want locals and main market to play the sport. Instead of focussing on big market and thinking about how to make money, lets think about how to develop the sport and take it to mainstream America.

  • likeintcricket on August 29, 2013, 15:42 GMT

    I live in Houston, Tx and there are currently quarter of a million Indian Americans ( Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis) live in greater Houston areas. Than there are others like Srilankans, Nepaleese, West Indians, British, Australians and so on. But sadly there is no official cricket stadium in Houston and hardly couple of decent pitches available. There is a lot of enthusiasm for cricket here and only from Houston we can raise a good competative team out of expatriats. It's hard to believe that UAE and Afghanistan are producing better teams and USA can't. The community here desperately wants to involve their kids in cricket activities and we need atleast 20 pitches to satisfy the demand. Currently most of the kids play either in the parking lots of apartmemnts, Temples, mosques or on some grounds with no pitches. They wants to play with regular cricket Gears and balls but due to safety reasons they can't. NY, Dallas, LA are other cities with great potential. ICC should wake up now.

  • Cpt.Meanster on August 29, 2013, 14:30 GMT

    @anton1234: We can agree to disagree. However, you mentioned a stat of 41%. Can you provide me with any valid proof or source as to where you came to know about it ? Which part of the USA represents that 41% are all important factors. So we need evidence when you give out such numbers. Also, the number of losses to the so called 'lesser' teams which you mentioned in your comment is a bit unfair. There are NO 'lesser' teams in MLB. All teams have a rich tradition and history in major league baseball. You probably meant slightly inconsistent teams yes ? Yes, there are inconsistent teams in baseball, my own Toronto Blue Jays are a fine example; winners of the 1992 and 1993 World Series title. But nowadays they are not so good. Anyway, in sport we have winners and losers; so what if these good teams lost to the others ? They are humans after all. It's the overall win ratio that I am talking about. Even cricket has its share of losers. It's part of professional sport.

  • wolf777 on August 29, 2013, 13:51 GMT

    For long time there was no term limit provision for Presidents in the US constitution. Presidents voluntarily served only two terms following a tradition that was started by our First President George Washington; who, despite being widely popular chose to retire after the end of his second term. In fact President Washington wanted to retire after the first term. Hope USACA office bearers learn from the example set by our Nation's first president.

  • on August 29, 2013, 12:53 GMT

    Jim Rhodes, there is another born and bred American guy that absolutely love to play cricket, and we need to put cricket I'm the schools, we need to get willow to make it free I'm the USA, then it will be easier for the American people to get an understanding of the game... and it will grow from there.

  • anton1234 on August 29, 2013, 10:32 GMT

    If a team has a win-loss record of 70-55 it means they would have lost a lot of matches to the lesser teams.

    Another thing, cricket doesn't need the US as much as it use to. One of the driving factors in trying to make the US into a decent cricket unit was money. Even as recently as 7-8 years ago cricket was poor relation to most sports, certainly compared to all the major sports around the world, but in the last few years finances have really taken off, owing mainly to the T20 cricket. Cricket has now become an attractive game for TV and sponsors. Cricketers are now well paid, still not close to soccer, baseball, basketball, but good enough for young cricketers not ditch the game in the late teens. For example, Australian Rules football use to prize away many Aussie cricketers in their teens because salaries and endoresements were much better, and football and basketball became a more lucrative option in the Caribbean, but things have changed dramatically in the last few years.

  • anton1234 on August 29, 2013, 8:34 GMT

    Capt . Meanster,

    I disagree with you that most Americans love baseball. In a recent highly credible nationwide survey as much as 41% of Americans said they don't follow baseball at all. That's a hefty chunk, not to mention many others who will only follow it semi-keenly, thus leaving around 20% or so that are what we might term as serious fans. Just look at World Series games. Those games get only 15 million people watching each game in a country of over 300 million.

  • gilbert84 on August 29, 2013, 5:03 GMT

    The USA gets far too much coverage on ESPN Cricinfo for a Third Division team. Yes, there is a cricket market in the country but not for the US team. And headline writers please look up what the word "revoke" means.

  • on August 29, 2013, 3:53 GMT

    for what it's worth I doubt seriously that there is much of a future for truly high level cricket on the American sports landscape, and I'm fine with that, as it is now it's almost like I've found a treasure that I don't have to share

  • on August 29, 2013, 3:51 GMT

    an individual baseball game can be random, but over the 162 game season the cream will rise to the top always. As far as tactics one of the things I really find attractive about cricket is that those tactical decisions are left to the players on the field. This is no longer the case in baseball especially at the professional level. Even individual pitches are often called from the dugout. But cricket like baseball is a thinking man's game, you have to make a real effort to understand the nuances to really gain maximum enjoyment, learning these has been a lot of fun for me, although its not easy, because all to often those describing the game on television assume a level of knowledge the new fan doesn't posses. As an England fan the best for me is to listen to the radio feed while watching the TV feed. Synching that however is real pain

  • on August 29, 2013, 3:26 GMT

    We can Make a better US Cricket Team by importing good players from Australia and South Africa., like USA made a good Soccer team by bringing players from abroad. Now US soccer team is growing up. I live USA, I see US cricket team consists of B Grade West Indian, Indian and Pakistan players. They cannot do much in the International level!!! After they retire, another immigrant B grade players will take over. It's like the same!!! Without creating Good School Cricket in any country there will be no good National team. Who will support that in Political level and in Sponsorships in USA??? Nobody! Its a long process and very long way. Unfortunately FIRST EVER INTERNATIONAL CRICKET match was played in New york USA in 1844 between Canada and USA. But afterwards Cricket died in the USA. Still R.I.P (Resting in Peace), but you never know !! Cricket could Rise If Possible (R.I.P.)

  • on August 29, 2013, 0:42 GMT

    Relinquish, not revoke. Seriously, the US revoking the ICC is like North Colorado granting Colorado its plea to partition

  • Cpt.Meanster on August 29, 2013, 0:07 GMT

    @anton1234: I disagree with you on most points. Baseball might seem random but it is NOT. The better teams will always come out on top. The Red Sox and Tampa Bay Rays are the BEST AL teams this season. The Toronto Blue Jays are the last placed team in the AL East division. I am an avid Blue Jay fan and I can tell you, we lost all the time to the Rays and Red Sox this season. We might win a game here and there but over all we lost. Like cricket, the poor teams will be found out eventually. Hence, your theory doesn't make sense nor is it true. Also, baseball is much simpler to explain and view which is why it may seem 'monotonous'. Cricket is just too complicated and messy which is why we have limited overs cricket in the form of T20 and ODIs. Because, test cricket is simply not worthy to watch over a long period of time. Baseball doesn't need any compromises or variants. It's the great American past time and most Americans love it.

  • Cpt.Meanster on August 29, 2013, 0:00 GMT

    @Nutcutlet: I think you are unfairly comparing baseball and cricket for the sake of argument. Both are extremely different with the only similarity being both sports involve a bat and a ball. You see, baseball is the American answer to Britain. Americans have been historically related to Britain in many ways. However, they have also developed a hatred and cynical thought process towards the Queen's land or rather King's land back in the day. They simply do not want to do anything with the UK and its way of life. Hence, they went on to do things differently. The American English has a different accent, they have a Republican system of government with a Federation of states and a president. They have a different judicial system compared to the Common Law present in the UK. And even sports are termed and played differently. Football is soccer, rugby is football, and the list goes on. Obviously, they don't like cricket. It has something to do with the UK after all.

  • on August 28, 2013, 21:59 GMT

    There is plenty of incredible talent all over the USA. Unfortunately nepotism and favoritism prevents real talent from coming into the limelight.... There should be no place for such deplorable acts in team selection but players with the right connections continue to get selected.... Sad but true...

  • Nutcutlet on August 28, 2013, 21:48 GMT

    @Sir F_Flintoff: thank you for taking the trouble to answer in detail. I can see that the premium on runs in baseball is second only to goals in soccer, a point Ed Smith makes somewhere. I appreciate that it attracts the more discriminating US sports fan - as a donnish Ozzie friend who's taught in the US said to me, the baseball cognescenti in the US (many of whom have fine & discriminating minds) would be avid cricket-followers if born & raised in England or Oz. That tells me that there's something to baseball that should engage the cricket-lover, because when it comes to sports (and literature), I'm unashamedly elitist. But I come back to the extra dimensions that cricket offers above bb. Only half the field offers scoring opportunities; only the cowshot is productive. No leg-glance/square/ late-cut/ hook behind square, let alone the 'ramp'! No turn off the wicket; no diving slip catch; no lightning stumping - no draws either. For most of us, that's what life is: an honourable draw!

  • GrindAR on August 28, 2013, 21:13 GMT

    $300K per annun... for the whole USA. It is as good as non-funding... People do put their own money to get things done that are in their reach. As a sports body, if it cannot help achieve some revenue streams due to in adequate funding... you cannot see the result... so it is as good as non-funding... How you pull the crowd... you have to play in places with stadium or equivalent to hold the people and vehicle traffic controls and parking... Some areas do it out of their own pockets and level of interests. To spread it across... You need some full time team to do that... and $300K p.a dont even meet their minimal labor wages.

  • espi on August 28, 2013, 19:51 GMT

    Tiring revisionism of actual history from a lot of folks. "The Tented Field" by Tom Melville is a great read about the history of cricket in North America. Most of the well footnoted facts in this book obviate much of the nonsense being posted by many here.

  • anton1234 on August 28, 2013, 19:26 GMT

    Sir Freddie,

    That's exactly what I mean. Baseball is too random. You can get lower ranked teams regularly beating the supposedly better teams. It's not unusual for the teams in any division during the regular season to have very similar win-loss record by the end of it, before the playoffs. It's not ususual also for one team to win 6-1 one day and lose 7-3 the next to the same team. It's just too random. Also,unlike cricket, the flow of baseball is too monotonous. Whereas in cricket ou can have periods where the tempo is raised when big hitters come in with series of boundaries or sixes, or a fast bowlers getting into a great rhythm and dominating batsmen, in baseball is too repetitive. Pitcher delivers, batter swings and misses and this goes on and then the occasional connection (usually mis-hit

  • offbreak123 on August 28, 2013, 18:48 GMT

    Very interesting comments all round. A few observations to some of the above.America did have the modern day equivalent of 'colonies',in many ways.There was (maybe still is) an American 'empire' out there.Certain aspects of American culture and sports took hold in them. As one would expect.Baseball and basketball became the most popular. I think it's great that the world has 2 major bat and ball games.One that one swing of the bat can change the outcome and one where there is more ebb and flow.One that relies on the difficulty of just hitting the ball and one in which how and where the batter hits the ball is more the issue."Dramatic effect" comes in various forms to the observer. Very few cricketers ever play Test cricket.But cricket players have enjoyed playing against walls,in streets, in 'formal' 20/25 over formats for decades.As a Canadian citizen myself maybe Americans might go for a Game that doesn't always have a winner or loser?And everything else that cricket offers.

  • Andhravala on August 28, 2013, 18:33 GMT

    We need to bring more than cricket to America, people in USA have equal fun outside of the game, example when they go for a Baseball game, they enjoy the food, gallery, atmosphere and company. Cricket in America should be made a 3 hour game, with lot of activities outside the field, if there is a match between India and West indies, bring their culture to the game (Food, Music, Events) and it will bring in crowds from India and West indies, with American people, who want to enjoy the other activities. I live in Colorado, my colleagues wants to come to a game and they also like Indian food, so if the game is advertised correctly and supported by Local business.. Cricket in USA can survive.

  • on August 28, 2013, 18:31 GMT

    Nobody outside the USA is in the slightest bit interested in including the USA in cricket. Except maybe the ICC. Real Cricket fans are not al all concerned in their participation.

  • landl47 on August 28, 2013, 18:24 GMT

    What a great idea! Cut off ties with the rest of the cricket world, don't play any more fixtures with ICC-associated countries and develop cricket from the ground up. Kids will be falling over themselves to play a game with no external competition or involvement and no chance of a professional career unless they emigrate.

    Come back in 50 years and find out where that's got the US. My guess is, playing baseball.

  • offbreak123 on August 28, 2013, 17:58 GMT

    The baseball cricket debate will never end as it's mostly about opinion anyway.Cricket fights a huge headwind in North America that goes way back,at least to JA Spaulding's time and his 'commission' in 1905 to 'prove' baseball wasn't 'derived' from,or linked in any way,to rounders and cricket,the 'discovery' of the Doubleday ball,a hoax,etc,etc.Henry Chadwick the 'father of baseball',who played cricket/baseball and even ended up coining/inventing batting average,the box score,out on a fly ball,etc, knew differently. Chadwick is a Baseball hall of Famer.Point is...for 100+ years cricket in North America has struggled with its image and the myths that surround it,guys in white sweaters,tea breaks,oddball game,etc.North American '$port'and '$porting/entertainment' is in no hurry to see this change. I have lived on the continent for 40+ years,like baseball and cricket, so feel I'm somewhat qualified on this one.A new 'headwind' for cricket doesn't surprise me at all.It comes from all sides

  • RajeshChenna on August 28, 2013, 17:14 GMT

    I live in San Jose, CA and we have a very good academy called Cricket Zeal Academy with coach Raghu B, one of the best coaches in US. Our kids are enjoying Cricket a lot and learning all cricket techniques in a short period.

  • Raki99 on August 28, 2013, 17:09 GMT

    Sports In US ranked as follows when it comes to fan following..... 1) American Football NFL(Starts In fall played On sunday) 2) American Fotball ( College Version played in fall starts tommorow) 3) Basket Ball NBA starts in late fall end in late spring 4) Basket Ball college starts again in late fall 5) Baseball start in early spring end in fall 6) Soccer Starts in early spring and end in late spring 7) NHL start in early fall ends in erly spring. Soccer has taken over the NHL and pretty soon compete with basket ball. The biggest reason all this sports and all the other olympics sports succeds in US is becasue of NCAA which runs each sports at the school and the college level in the US. Also most of this Sports at the max go own for 3 to 3.5 hours. sports in US is about party before the game and after the game. So t20 is the only format which has a chance to which can survice in US. forget about the one day and test.

  • kentuckycricket on August 28, 2013, 16:54 GMT

    I live in Louisville, KY, and my team has just been knocked out of the playoffs of the Midwest Cricket Tournament, something that did not exist until a few years ago. I think it started with 5 teams - this year there were, I think, 24 teams playing across three states, Ohio, Indiana and Kentucky. This weekend there was a tournament in Louisville called the Mayor's Cup, sponsored by the office of the Mayor of Louisville and the winning team got $1000 to share between them. Yes, the players are all ex-pats, virtually all of them from India and Pakistan, and I think I am the only Englishman that plays in the league. But so what? Cricket everywhere is primarily played by Indian and Pakistani ex-pats, and although it's very difficult to get locals interested there has been a huge increase in the volume of players over the last ten years, for which we can thank the IT industry. Now is not the time to give up on cricket in the USA.

  • Cpt.Meanster on August 28, 2013, 16:40 GMT

    As a Canadian citizen, I must admit that cricket will NEVER be popular here and in the USA. It is simple; our people love other sports which are in many ways BETTER than cricket, test cricket in particular. Test cricket is long, and very confusing to explain to people who have traditionally been busy, hard working, and socio-centric. Unlike the UK, there isn't time for leisure during daylight hours in Canada or the USA. Test cricket needs investment in time, 5 long days, broken down to 3 sessions, 2 hours per session, good weather conditions etc. The great sport of baseball doesn't. It's a logical and practical sport that doesn't believe in draws or net run rates. There will always be a winner and loser. And most importantly, it concludes in just over 3 hours. Americans don't have any need for cricket, given they already have the world's best sporting leagues. Their fans are satisfied with all that. Cricket is just a forgotten entity as far as North America is concerned.

  • big.apple on August 28, 2013, 16:36 GMT

    Cricket is pretty similar to baseball. That said, the game has evolved enough over the years to generate enough drama, sporting stories and entertainment in 3 hours per game. Cricket, however, seems to be going through an identity crisis currently, and hasnt evolved as quickly: starting off as a 5 day game(one full workweek!) to a full day, to the more recent 3 hour version.

    I wouldn't imagine cricket being on the scale of football/basketball/baseball/tennis/golf anytime soon, not atleast in my generation :)

  • cricket_golf_chess on August 28, 2013, 15:53 GMT

    Because of the tactics based on complexity of pitch and weather variations, fielding positions and placements with 10 fielders against various batters, batting order, team composition especially bowlers- pace, swing, spin combination- based on pitch and conditions, bowling changes, batting order etc cricket as a game embodies some of the unique qualities of golf, base ball and chess. Oh! what a magnificent and greatest of sports cricket is!!!

  • vkal on August 28, 2013, 15:36 GMT

    I must add the plethora of bowling variations makes it difficult for Batsmen as well and makes the game more challenging and difficult to learn (if you are playing). I believe batsment in cricket needs to have a better hands eye cordination that most other sports including base ball.

    Think about a fast bowler can bowl can bowl variety of lengths, pace, bowl cutting in or out, bowl swinging in or out. Its just amazing how many variations are there for bowlers and batsmen and they only a split second to make the decision.

    Disclaimer: I have played cricket for a long time and baseball for last couple of years. I do enjoy both sports. But cricket wins it for me.

  • on August 28, 2013, 15:32 GMT

    Baseball is more technical, tactical and analytical than Cricket!? Whoa. Thought it was otherway round.

  • azaro on August 28, 2013, 15:14 GMT

    Same old issues we heard in the 80's/90's when USACA harassed US Junior Cricket out of existence despite CA having 4,000 children playing cricket in elementary schools in the nineties! That would have given a better launching pad for dealing with the issue of transition from expatriates to indigenous players and administrators. Now CA has an academy and I hear of more springing up across the US. Get out of the way and help fund their play!

    USACA is still plagued by governance issues which has been the case for forty years now; that is where the expatriates need to be swept out by a new American broom. Americans do know how to organise sports. Appointing Lockerbie with his world cup experience was a fantastic start but where is he now? I don't think he was in the job a year?

    Get the organisation at the top right and the rest will follow. This is the third start I know of and Harrison has a point; the ICC should be part of the solution and stop being an enabler of the problem.

  • timmyj on August 28, 2013, 15:12 GMT

    Why would anyone prefer cricket to baseball? Ask the baseball fans who have to sit through a 16 inning game, with half a dozen pitching changes. A T20 is over in 20 overs and at the most one super over. Maybe that's why surveys have shown 41% of Americans don't follow baseball.

  • tanstell87 on August 28, 2013, 14:51 GMT

    @Jim Rhodes - Indian fan here...good to know from you...the theory here in India is if USA & China take keen interest in cricket, then they will rule this game...i would like to see a strong USA team in future with local USA players and not a team made of Asian immigrants...good luck !

  • AJ_Tiger86 on August 28, 2013, 14:39 GMT

    @NutCutlet: One thing that sets baseball apart from most other sport, like cricket and soccer, is its randomness. The worst team in the MLB will go on to beat the best team almost 40% of the time. In test cricket, SA/Eng would beat Bangladesh almost 95% of the time, and even in T20s around 85% of the time. Baseball can make instant heroes out of unknown players. A hitter can hit a walk off home run off the best pitcher in the league to win his team the game. The game changes leads and favourites very quickly and unexpectedly. One swing of the bat can undo a whole night's work. A six or a wicket in cricket, on the other hand, does not have the same dramatic effect even in T20s. I think both sports can be enjoyed equally fondly. But the pose a significant barrier to entry which prevents baseball in the UK, and cricket in the US from gaining widespread exposure.

  • AJ_Tiger86 on August 28, 2013, 14:33 GMT

    @NutCutlet: I think baseball is not much different to cricket in terms of global reach. Cricket is not a major sport in any country where the British colony didn't exist. The fact that Americans never had such colonies explains the relative lack of baseball's spread around the world. The USA did occupy Japan after the WWII which is responsible for baseball becoming the most popular sport there. In the Caribbean and parts of Latin America it is immensely popular. Problem with both cricket and baseball is that they are difficult to pick up for outsiders. The rules of both sport are complex compared to, say, football, basketball or tennis. As for some of the other comparisons between cricket and baseball, yes, pitches/conditions play a big role in cricket, whereas in baseball park factors are not THAT significant. Pitchers though possess lots of variety -- fastball, changeup, curveball, slider, knuckleball which can be directly compared to cricket's deliveries. (contd 1/2)

  • on August 28, 2013, 14:23 GMT

    The desperation of the ICC to penetrate the US market for cricket is funny. US will never appreciate cricket, even the T20 format. As Nasser Hussain and Rahul Dravid mentioned in a seminar few days back, countries such as Zimbabwe, Bangladesh are struggling be it ODIs or Tests. ICC would do well strengthen the standard of current playing nations rather than pursing the Utopian dream of penetrating US market.

  • kumarcoolbuddy on August 28, 2013, 14:19 GMT

    @Sir_Freddie_Flintoff, "great sports like Baseball and American Football (so called football in which played only with hand)"? I think you are the right person to answer my questions. Why is football named so when 99% of the game is played with hand? Why are those series called as World series when it is played only with US states? I was ROFL after looking at the comment on baseball "It's more technical, tactical and the analysis around it is something cricket can't match". This shows that your statement is very very immature and you don't know anything about cricket.

  • Viratkohlirocks on August 28, 2013, 14:03 GMT

    I am a an American from california. And here in my area, cricket is popular. We have a huge association callled CCA, and klots of people have plaed cricket before and still enjoy the gsme

  • Nutcutlet on August 28, 2013, 13:38 GMT

    @ Sir_F_Flintoff on (August 28, 2013, 12:34 GMT): interesting points. I've just read Playing HardBall by Ed Smith & so I come armed with something short of complete ignorance of the points you're making. Nonetheless, I wonder why it is that baseball hasn't made the impact on the world stage that cricket has, given that cricket is a much more complicated game to set up (wicket prep, a wardrobe of equipment & furniture, with individual bats made to order). After all, US influence for the last 100 yrs has been massive & global. Indeed, why does the 'World Series' kid itself that the US is 'the World'? Better stories? I remain unconvinced. Dig back into cricket's past, way before 1871 - there are stories aplenty. I do think that the analysis of cricket is getting much closer to that of baseball, with the advent of computer tech. How many different deliveries can a pitcher make compared with the variety of bowled deliveries? I count at least 11. Pitch variations & weather? Yr comms, please!

  • anton1234 on August 28, 2013, 13:26 GMT

    Baseball better thanc cricket? Dream on. However, I do agree with you that cricket and baseball are competing and similar sports in terms of being and bat and ball games and therefore it will be extremely difficult for cricket to carve out a niche, whereas there isn't anything similar to soccer in the US. Unlike baseball, where you can form of a good international side even with few hundred in the country playing the sport, you need at least 10s of thousands before you can form a decent international side in cricket.

    Baseball relies a lot in luck. This is why during the regular season top teams almost lose as many matches as they win.

  • binayrai0126 on August 28, 2013, 13:08 GMT

    Organised T20 Matches,with the established team...or with top 8 teams..1st target should be to create interest in the local people..so try with T20 first.

  • PrasPunter on August 28, 2013, 13:04 GMT

    I wonder if the game would pick up big time in the US . US would be hesitant to embrace a common-wealth sport.

  • on August 28, 2013, 13:03 GMT

    Is it me or is the USACA always promising a new and better future?

  • on August 28, 2013, 13:01 GMT

    Jamie Harrison - for the win. The sooner that the ICC wakes up to the reality of what's going on in America, and stops wasting time and money on USACA, the better. The ACF is a far better option. Mr. Richardson: Let my people go!

  • AJ_Tiger86 on August 28, 2013, 12:34 GMT

    Cricket was never going to take off in the US, no matter how much effort administrators put into it. When you have great sports like Baseball and American Football, it's understandable why cricket, and even soccer, wouldn't appeal to the masses. Baseball is an amazing sport with probably the richest professional history going back to 1871. It's in almost every single way better viewing than Test/ODI or T20 cricket. Baseball makes for better storylines than cricket. It's more technical, tactical and the analysis around it is something cricket can't match. The money involved in MLB and NFL puts even the Premier League to shame, let alone cricket. Even as an Englishman I like baseball just as much as cricket, with NFL a close 3rd. Why on earth would someone who has lived all his life in America want to choose cricket ahead of baseball is beyond me.

  • PrasPunter on August 28, 2013, 12:32 GMT

    If at all india can claim that they are better than the US, it is with the game of cricket !!! so atleast for that sake, let US remain a member.

  • on August 28, 2013, 12:31 GMT

    I knew things were bad in US cricket but when the head coach of the youth squad is forced to take such a drastic stance, it speaks volumes about the USACA.

  • on August 28, 2013, 12:31 GMT

    I knew things were bad in US cricket but when the head coach of the youth squad is forced to take such a drastic stance, it speaks volumes about the USACA.

  • PrasPunter on August 28, 2013, 12:32 GMT

    If at all india can claim that they are better than the US, it is with the game of cricket !!! so atleast for that sake, let US remain a member.

  • AJ_Tiger86 on August 28, 2013, 12:34 GMT

    Cricket was never going to take off in the US, no matter how much effort administrators put into it. When you have great sports like Baseball and American Football, it's understandable why cricket, and even soccer, wouldn't appeal to the masses. Baseball is an amazing sport with probably the richest professional history going back to 1871. It's in almost every single way better viewing than Test/ODI or T20 cricket. Baseball makes for better storylines than cricket. It's more technical, tactical and the analysis around it is something cricket can't match. The money involved in MLB and NFL puts even the Premier League to shame, let alone cricket. Even as an Englishman I like baseball just as much as cricket, with NFL a close 3rd. Why on earth would someone who has lived all his life in America want to choose cricket ahead of baseball is beyond me.

  • on August 28, 2013, 13:01 GMT

    Jamie Harrison - for the win. The sooner that the ICC wakes up to the reality of what's going on in America, and stops wasting time and money on USACA, the better. The ACF is a far better option. Mr. Richardson: Let my people go!

  • on August 28, 2013, 13:03 GMT

    Is it me or is the USACA always promising a new and better future?

  • PrasPunter on August 28, 2013, 13:04 GMT

    I wonder if the game would pick up big time in the US . US would be hesitant to embrace a common-wealth sport.

  • binayrai0126 on August 28, 2013, 13:08 GMT

    Organised T20 Matches,with the established team...or with top 8 teams..1st target should be to create interest in the local people..so try with T20 first.

  • anton1234 on August 28, 2013, 13:26 GMT

    Baseball better thanc cricket? Dream on. However, I do agree with you that cricket and baseball are competing and similar sports in terms of being and bat and ball games and therefore it will be extremely difficult for cricket to carve out a niche, whereas there isn't anything similar to soccer in the US. Unlike baseball, where you can form of a good international side even with few hundred in the country playing the sport, you need at least 10s of thousands before you can form a decent international side in cricket.

    Baseball relies a lot in luck. This is why during the regular season top teams almost lose as many matches as they win.

  • Nutcutlet on August 28, 2013, 13:38 GMT

    @ Sir_F_Flintoff on (August 28, 2013, 12:34 GMT): interesting points. I've just read Playing HardBall by Ed Smith & so I come armed with something short of complete ignorance of the points you're making. Nonetheless, I wonder why it is that baseball hasn't made the impact on the world stage that cricket has, given that cricket is a much more complicated game to set up (wicket prep, a wardrobe of equipment & furniture, with individual bats made to order). After all, US influence for the last 100 yrs has been massive & global. Indeed, why does the 'World Series' kid itself that the US is 'the World'? Better stories? I remain unconvinced. Dig back into cricket's past, way before 1871 - there are stories aplenty. I do think that the analysis of cricket is getting much closer to that of baseball, with the advent of computer tech. How many different deliveries can a pitcher make compared with the variety of bowled deliveries? I count at least 11. Pitch variations & weather? Yr comms, please!

  • Viratkohlirocks on August 28, 2013, 14:03 GMT

    I am a an American from california. And here in my area, cricket is popular. We have a huge association callled CCA, and klots of people have plaed cricket before and still enjoy the gsme