Why Is Cricket Not Popular In The U.s. And Canada?

Top Contributors
Raja100 said:
I live in Canada and I basically have to search hard just to find cricket on tv. I thought of some reasons why cricket has not made it to the mainstream...tell my what you think.

http://www.infobarrel.com/Selling_cricket_to_Canada_and_the_US
Click to expand...
Empire. All of the countries that are involved in cricket have close associations with the British Empire. I'm not that clued up on Canada's history, but as far as I'm aware it didn't feature that big in Englands Empire plans. Canada's immigrant population between 1850 - 1900 would have been a big mix and the British Empires impact relatively small? On wikipedia there's a breakdown of the populations ethnic mix from 2006 and none of the countries apart from English have a great cricket heritage. Also would it be true to say that existance in Canada in the pioneering days would have been harsh, I saw that 30% of the immigrants died within a short period of arriving and that doesn't really sound that conducive with getting a cricket 'scene' going and your countries history sounds pretty hectic and traumatic. What about the weather and geography in the English settlements - might that have worked against cricket getting established back then?

It seems that the white population that have English origins, for some reason or another never got cricket off the ground in the same way that they did elsewhere and the indigenous peoples were either being persecuted or massacared by the whites, so never got a game. Perhaps the French and the rest of the white Europens didn't like the looks of it and they did other things. It's only recently it seems with the influx of people from the indian sub-continent, who have a 'cricket heritage' that cricket in Canada seems to be more prominent. All of the teams and people I've ever come across from Canada with the exception of one person have all been of Asian origin. It's the same in the USA, cricket in both Canada and the USA seems to be played almost exclusively by Asian or Afro-Carribean blokes, for some reason the whites don't buy into it.

Just read your link after writing this. Yeah you've got your work cut out if your trying to get cricket on par with some of your bigger sports there in Canada. There's a few other threads on here, where this has been discussed in more depth, people have talked about sponsorship and the economics. The perception here in England is that cricket is on the verge of some kind of crisis. Cricket was once a key feature of school life and kids would be seen in the streets playing it. Cricket in the UK has been virtually monopolised by the corrupt Murdoch empire, meaning that in order to access it, you have to be relatively wealthy to be able to afford Murdochs 'Sky TV'. There's a highlight package that is broadcast on terrestial TV but it's often on at a time when kids are in bed or their parents are watching a program called East Enders which is a kind of 'Soma' for the people. The net result is that kids of a young age in ever increasing numbers never get to see or play cricket which doesn't bode well for the game. County games are not that well attended with stadiums virtually empty. Modern life with the demands of work mean that people can't get the time to watch games and the entrance fees are expensive as well. Add to that there is so much that people can do these days, that the lesiure choices mean that people do other things.

According to the 2006 census, the largest self-reported ethnic origin is Canadian (32%), followed by English (21%), French (15.8%), Scottish (15.1%), Irish (13.9%), German (10.2%), Italian (4.6%), Chinese (4.3%), First Nations (4.0%), Ukrainian (3.9%), and Dutch (3.3%).[156] There are 600 recognized First Nations governments or bands encompassing 1,172,790 people.[157]
 
someblokecalleddave said:
Empire. All of the countries that are involved in cricket have close associations with the British Empire. I'm not that clued up on Canada's history, but as far as I'm aware it didn't feature that big in Englands Empire plans. Canada's immigrant population between 1850 - 1900 would have been a big mix and the British Empires impact relatively small? On wikipedia there's a breakdown of the populations ethnic mix from 2006 and none of the countries apart from English have a great cricket heritage. Also would it be true to say that existance in Canada in the pioneering days would have been harsh, I saw that 30% of the immigrants died within a short period of arriving and that doesn't really sound that conducive with getting a cricket 'scene' going and your countries history sounds pretty hectic and traumatic. What about the weather and geography in the English settlements - might that have worked against cricket getting established back then?

It seems that the white population that have English origins, for some reason or another never got cricket off the ground in the same way that they did elsewhere and the indigenous peoples were either being persecuted or massacared by the whites, so never got a game. Perhaps the French and the rest of the white Europens didn't like the looks of it and they did other things. It's only recently it seems with the influx of people from the indian sub-continent, who have a 'cricket heritage' that cricket in Canada seems to be more prominent. All of the teams and people I've ever come across from Canada with the exception of one person have all been of Asian origin. It's the same in the USA, cricket in both Canada and the USA seems to be played almost exclusively by Asian or Afro-Carribean blokes, for some reason the whites don't buy into it.

Just read your link after writing this. Yeah you've got your work cut out if your trying to get cricket on par with some of your bigger sports there in Canada. There's a few other threads on here, where this has been discussed in more depth, people have talked about sponsorship and the economics. The perception here in England is that cricket is on the verge of some kind of crisis. Cricket was once a key feature of school life and kids would be seen in the streets playing it. Cricket in the UK has been virtually monopolised by the corrupt Murdoch empire, meaning that in order to access it, you have to be relatively wealthy to be able to afford Murdochs 'Sky TV'. There's a highlight package that is broadcast on terrestial TV but it's often on at a time when kids are in bed or their parents are watching a program called East Enders which is a kind of 'Soma' for the people. The net result is that kids of a young age in ever increasing numbers never get to see or play cricket which doesn't bode well for the game. County games are not that well attended with stadiums virtually empty. Modern life with the demands of work mean that people can't get the time to watch games and the entrance fees are expensive as well. Add to that there is so much that people can do these days, that the lesiure choices mean that people do other things.

According to the 2006 census, the largest self-reported ethnic origin is Canadian (32%), followed by English (21%), French (15.8%), Scottish (15.1%), Irish (13.9%), German (10.2%), Italian (4.6%), Chinese (4.3%), First Nations (4.0%), Ukrainian (3.9%), and Dutch (3.3%).[156] There are 600 recognized First Nations governments or bands encompassing 1,172,790 people.[157]
Click to expand...
The weather did play a big part to determine which sports were played most often i.e. ice hockey, football, skiing and curling.
However we do have a spring and summer which is good weather for cricket so I have ruled out the weather as a factor.
I think what you said about perception is a big part of the problem here. We like "tough guy" sports here for the most part and we as a culture look down on the more refined ones. Even though curling is a popular most of the public doesn't take it seriously. Almost all of the sports that are followed by the mainstream have some sort of physical contact.
What you said about the various alternative lesiure choices is also true here. I think many sports have suffered from people tuning out and watching something else. In the past we had 30-40 tv stations mostly local as of now its 0ver 500 not including the internet ,dvd's, ppv etc
Is there a possibility of a re-vival of this great sport?
 
I think the idea of having a ball thrown at 90mph at your head or testicles and not flinching when it happens and better still not saying anything about it makes other sports look like a bit wussy in my opinion http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-f5pfBgpNE
show many any equivalent to this where it's within the rules of the game and people don't start fighting each other.
 
Raja100 said:
The weather did play a big part to determine which sports were played most often i.e. ice hockey, football, skiing and curling.
However we do have a spring and summer which is good weather for cricket so I have ruled out the weather as a factor.
I think what you said about perception is a big part of the problem here. We like "tough guy" sports here for the most part and we as a culture look down on the more refined ones. Even though curling is a popular most of the public doesn't take it seriously. Almost all of the sports that are followed by the mainstream have some sort of physical contact.
What you said about the various alternative lesiure choices is also true here. I think many sports have suffered from people tuning out and watching something else. In the past we had 30-40 tv stations mostly local as of now its 0ver 500 not including the internet ,dvd's, ppv etc
Is there a possibility of a re-vival of this great sport?
Click to expand...

Have you considered other environmental factors? Being in the northern hemisphere, Canada was/is competing with other northern hemisphere countries for attention. I'm not a diligent enough student of the history of the game to know for sure, but I understand geography enough to know that Scotland, Ireland, India, Sri Lanka and Pakistan are all much closer to England than Canada is. Australia, New Zealand and the African nations (all the main African cricket playing nations are either on the equator or in the southern hemisphere) are far away but have their summers when English cricket isn't in-season - time off equals travel opportunity. Canada was a bloody long haul in the days before air travel and taking a boat there during cricket season probably wasn't high on the agenda. No serious competition = opportunity for other sports. And there were plenty of Americans willing to play hockey and football to provide competition.

Distance + inconvenience = opportunity for other sports to get settled and dominate.

As for your final question...I live in America so I only have a rudimentary understanding of your situation but I'd have to guess at highly improbable. Other sports have had time to become ingrained, if you were going to stage a cricket revival it probably needed to happen a century or two earlier.
 
someblokecalleddave said:
I think the idea of having a ball thrown at 90mph at your head or testicles and not flinching when it happens and better still not saying anything about it makes other sports look like a bit wussy in my opinion
show many any equivalent to this where it's within the rules of the game and people don't start fighting each other.
Click to expand...

We've got the same problem in the Netherlands. I showed this vid to one of my class mates, and he didn't think it was spectacular, so I asked him what he didn't like. What he disliked the most was the bowling. Many people in Holland don't like cricket, just because they think bowling is gay. The other problem is that the people over here only like soccer, and eg. hockey is for snobs, and the same goes for cricket and you can't just change the mindset of the people, so I think cricket in eg. The Netherlands is doomed.
 
DutchGuy said:
We've got the same problem in the Netherlands. I showed this vid to one of my class mates, and he didn't think it was spectacular, so I asked him what he didn't like. What he disliked the most was the bowling. Many people in Holland don't like cricket, just because they think bowling is gay. The other problem is that the people over here only like soccer, and eg. hockey is for snobs, and the same goes for cricket and you can't just change the mindset of the people, so I think cricket in eg. The Netherlands is doomed.
Click to expand...

I can't see how anyone can think bowling is gay! Having played cricket, surfed, Skateboarded, swam, rock climbed, abseiled, ran and played football, plus done loads of other things, I've never been that enthralled by football and would argue that it isn't that 'Macho' or hard and I look at it in disbelief at how its captured the attention of the public in the way that it has. (Big discussion in the offing here I reckon). Cricket has - even here in the UK got that 'Posh' aspect to it and I can see how football types buy into that. In a way Cricket here does look in the longer term as though it too is doomed, If I think about my local area I can list 5 or 6 pitches that have disappeared over the last 25 years. Cricket takes too much kit for most people to be bothered with and these days here in the UK with the coverage being hi-jacked by SKY TV and schools no longer having it as a part of the curriculum and even if they did, the likelyhood is that the games masters wouldn't know how to play the game. All that adds up to a long term decline. Add to that the nature of the way we work here in the UK (Probablys same elsewhere) we're slaves to our credit cards and keeping up with the Jones's, parents haven't got time to drive their kids to training and matches, they're too busy maintaining their Facebook accounts and getting their fat arses down to the local take-away, so even if the kids did want to play cricket they're probably too obese and unfit with on-going physical abnormalities because they never have done sport!
 
Can not stand soccer, yes soccer. Each country and region develops its own sports. Clearly the USA was never going to go for an English game. Canada have other sports that are more relavant to their weather and culture. Love Ice Hockey.
 
Canada is also next to the USA geographically and its culture is similar to that of the US. It's very hard to penetrate a market like that when it is fixated on sports associated with its neighbour.
 
In the past, it was mainly because cricket games lasted too long. Most American team sports last 3 hours per game. The sports fans here are not conditioned to watch 8 hours or more for a single result. Second reason was a lack of investment which is very much tied to the first reason I gave. The would-be investors knew an 8 hour long game, let alone test cricket, would not fly here so they decided not to waste their money. Without necessary investments (esp. in stadiums, because most stadiums here are not suitable for cricket) the sport never had a chance.

Over the last 10 years, the main reason was ICC's lack of vision. For a quick cash grab they relegated cricket to a pay-per-view sport in the US (I don't know if it's the same in Canada) where only the most hardcore and knowledgeable fans would shell out the money. That's not a model for growth. To grow you need to make it available in one of the hundreds of channels that are available, so that casual fans can also watch and curios viewers can learn about the game and get interested over time. If FIFA followed the same model as ICC's they could have made tens of millions out of the immigrant soccer fans in the short term but soccer in the US would not have grown into the multi-billion dollar industry it is now. The US rights fee for the 2018 and 2012 world cup just sold for $1.05 billion and that' just one soccer property! There's a lesson in there for ICC.

But, all that is in the past. I'm glad there's a version of the game available now that is of perfect length for American viewers. And the fact that ICC finally realized the error in their ways and got a deal with ESPN to open up the market. The investments are also coming together to professionalize USA cricket and for a national T-20 league. Combine that with the grassroots movements taking place it seems to me a perfect storm is brewing for a cricket resurgence. The next 10-20 years should be very exciting for cricket's development as the last couple decades was for soccer!
 
Bariaga said:
In the past, it was mainly because cricket games lasted too long. Most American team sports last 3 hours per game. The sports fans here are not conditioned to watch 8 hours or more for a single result. Second reason was a lack of investment which is very much tied to the first reason I gave. The would-be investors knew an 8 hour long game, let alone test cricket, would not fly here so they decided not to waste their money. Without necessary investments (esp. in stadiums, because most stadiums here are not suitable for cricket) the sport never had a chance.

Over the last 10 years, the main reason was ICC's lack of vision. For a quick cash grab they relegated cricket to a pay-per-view sport in the US (I don't know if it's the same in Canada) where only the most hardcore and knowledgeable fans would shell out the money. That's not a model for growth. To grow you need to make it available in one of the hundreds of channels that are available, so that casual fans can also watch and curios viewers can learn about the game and get interested over time. If FIFA followed the same model as ICC's they could have made tens of millions out of the immigrant soccer fans in the short term but soccer in the US would not have grown into the multi-billion dollar industry it is now. The US rights fee for the 2018 and 2012 world cup just sold for $1.05 billion and that' just one soccer property! There's a lesson in there for ICC.

But, all that is in the past. I'm glad there's a version of the game available now that is of perfect length for American viewers. And the fact that ICC finally realized the error in their ways and got a deal with ESPN to open up the market. The investments are also coming together to professionalize USA cricket and for a national T-20 league. Combine that with the grassroots movements taking place it seems to me a perfect storm is brewing for a cricket resurgence. The next 10-20 years should be very exciting for cricket's development as the last couple decades was for soccer!
Click to expand...


That's good to here. So where is cricket happening - I'm aware that there are pockets of cricket in a few areas and one area near Orlando has a stadium? California and New York as far as I know have cricket teams too, but these are generally made up of people from African and Indian backgrounds who have an cultural connection through the old British Empire. Is cricket getting through to the white population yet? Are there any other places in the USA where there are enough teams that they form leagues yet?
 
someblokecalleddave said:
Is cricket getting through to the white population yet?
Click to expand...
Cricket is nearly non-existent among this demographic. But that's where the ICC/CLT20-ESPN deals and investments from Cricket Holdings/NZCricket and their investors come in. It has to start somewhere. I expect all involved to lose money for few years, maybe even a decade but with a smart/conservative plan and long term commitment cricket will find a successful and profitable niche like soccer has. For cricket it may even come easier than soccer because of so many similarities it has with American sports (played with hands, high scoring, toughness - no protective gloves for most players, no shortage of meaningful statistics which Americans love, enough breaks for TV ads etc.).

Are there any other places in the USA where there are enough teams that they form leagues yet?
Click to expand...
I have no idea. I read about Cricket Holdings' plan to start the league with teams in Florida, New York, Philadelphia, LA, Toronto and Las Vegas. They are just waiting for enough investors. Maybe their price tags (up to $240 mil for 6 franchises according to the article below) are keeping some of the would-be investors away. That's a very high aim, in my opinion, especially for a league with short, 3-4 week seasons in a 'new' sport.

http://www.canadacricket.com/?p=2425
 
The collective intelligence of our American and sad to say Canadian bretheren is quite limited. American sports are on the whole crap. Basketball a game invented to keep footballers fit during the summer. The most overated sport ever conceived and yet they make it into something special with a bunch of 7ft prima donnas running around slam duinking into a 10ft hoop.How challenging. Lift the hoop to 15 feet and I will be impressed.The players are so dumb that they cannot make a decision without a coach calling a time out every few minutes to tell them what to do. The coach then takes over to get his hour of fame as he carrys on like a lunatic. Then you have American football. A game which consists of 4 20 moinute quarters which runs for 5 hours whilst they take endless commercial breaks. There are players who play the game what have never touched the ball in a game during their career. The supporters are so drunk by the end of the game that they don't know or care who has won. Then you have baseball where so called brilliant athletes need gloves to catch a ball and even then they can't do it.It is a unique game in that a pitcher can elect to avoid pitching to a batter. There is no other sport in the world where a so called elite athlete can simply avoid pitching to an opponent. Glad Bradman never played baseball, would never have got a bat. Overated sport and will die a slow death in a few years if ratings are to be believed. Finally there is ice skating. Actually i don't mind ice skating so I will leave that one alone.It still puzzles me that two players can punch each other for five miunutes and then get five minutes in the sin bin. The referees just stand there and count the punches. Once 20/20 is introduced into the US they will jump at it, and I suspect that they will probably be good at it with the bat anyway, not sure they will understand the concept of bowling. Far too much thinking involved and Americans not very good at that.
 
Very harsh Clocker, that's a very uninformed, generalising post. Whilst the majority of American sports aren't my own cup of tea this is the type of attitude which prevents cricket entrenching itself in markets such as America and Canada which are home to about 400 million people, a market which is more than 18 times bigger than Australia.

Let's not forget Australian football was invented to help keep cricketers fit during the winter. So our main football code compares with Basketball in one way, not to mention both sports are very skillful and played at high pace, something which only elite players can do. Some of the skills shown in basketball are pretty impressive as are the ones demonstrated in the AFL. The other sports are also highly skillful in their own ways also even though that they are all very different. To rubbish them completely like that is not the way to go.

Cricket has a long way to go before it even becomes a minor sport in North America and I doubt many will jump at it like you have stated. The ICC isn't doing enough to promote the sport and aren't willing to spend the dollars necessary to at least gain some footholes in the region. T20 cricket is fairly uninspiring although it's probably the only way to introduce the game in the area and until there are a range of people/ventures will to promote, foster and nurture the sport it will go nowhere for a long time. The T20 franchise idea is a great start but probably needs to be downgraded a little to at least start some new beginnings.
 
If anybody is really interested, I asked the President of the United States Youth Cricket Association http://usyca.org and I found his answer absolutely fascinating. So much so that I thought I would share with you...

Cricket was America's first team sport. Played by colonists and then by the earliest citizens of our new republic, there was a time when it stood alone atop America's games. This fact is attested to by the fact that the first international sporting event was a cricket match between the US and Canada held in New York in 1844. For much of the nineteenth century, cricket and baseball were on an equal footing with the US population. So what happened?

Baseball, ever keen to find a mass market for its product, spent the 1800s tweaking its rules until it developed into a sport that was easy to learn, fun to play and also entertaining to watch. Cricket, on the other hand, stodgily refused to modify itself, mainly out of a combination of classism, arrogance and a misplaced love of "tradition." As a result, baseball became the "national pastime" and cricket became increasingly marginalized in America. By the turn of the century, cricket was a game played only by country club members, mainly in Philadelphia.

The end of the twentieth century has seen cricket revived in North America, mainly due to immigration from the Indian subcontinent and the advent of limited-overs matches. The State Department's Bureau of International Information Programs now estimates there are more than 100,000 active adult cricket players in the US, and that figure climbs every year. The problem is that the ethnic enclaves that embrace cricket tend to be insular and even the leaders of these communities are uncomfortable with being cast as spokespersons for the game to the indigenous population. As a result, cricket in America has had to rely on a constant flow of immigrants to survive, and even now these immigration patterns are slowing. The model, therefore, is not sustainable.

The USYCA mission is to take the game to children in schools, and having introduced the game to them there, to provide opportunities for them to learn the game properly outside of school, with the object being to systematically build an indigenous base of cricket players and fans. We look to the example of American soccer in the early 1970s, which went from an immigrant, niche sport to the mainstream because of its adoption by schools and youth sports organizations. We intend to follow this model, only with more of a focused national vision than did soccer, which developed more organically.

So far, our approach has paid off. In the past year, USYCA has donated over 700 cricket sets to schools in the United States, and because of the USYCA Schools Program, cricket is being played by hundreds of thousands of American schoolchildren. USYCA has also begun the process of creating introductory youth cricket programs, under the auspices of established community sports organizations, for the Summer of 2012.

So, with our grassroots, bottom-up approach, things are changing, but it will take time to see results at the senior level. There's nothing to be gained by rushing the process, though, and much to be eventually gained by doing the job right.
 
CLOCKER said:
The collective intelligence of our American and sad to say Canadian bretheren is quite limited. American sports are on the whole crap. Basketball a game invented to keep footballers fit during the summer. The most overated sport ever conceived and yet they make it into something special with a bunch of 7ft prima donnas running around slam duinking into a 10ft hoop.How challenging. Lift the hoop to 15 feet and I will be impressed.The players are so dumb that they cannot make a decision without a coach calling a time out every few minutes to tell them what to do. The coach then takes over to get his hour of fame as he carrys on like a lunatic. Then you have American football. A game which consists of 4 20 moinute quarters which runs for 5 hours whilst they take endless commercial breaks. There are players who play the game what have never touched the ball in a game during their career. The supporters are so drunk by the end of the game that they don't know or care who has won. Then you have baseball where so called brilliant athletes need gloves to catch a ball and even then they can't do it.It is a unique game in that a pitcher can elect to avoid pitching to a batter. There is no other sport in the world where a so called elite athlete can simply avoid pitching to an opponent. Glad Bradman never played baseball, would never have got a bat. Overated sport and will die a slow death in a few years if ratings are to be believed. Finally there is ice skating. Actually i don't mind ice skating so I will leave that one alone.It still puzzles me that two players can punch each other for five miunutes and then get five minutes in the sin bin. The referees just stand there and count the punches. Once 20/20 is introduced into the US they will jump at it, and I suspect that they will probably be good at it with the bat anyway, not sure they will understand the concept of bowling. Far too much thinking involved and Americans not very good at that.
Click to expand...

Slightly deviating and somewhat appearing to be having a pop at the Seppo's 'Boris' wrote this elsewhere and Boris is a baseball player in the Aussie off-season...


All this said, baseballs seem to be designed for an incredibly boring and one-sided affair. Despite loving pitching, I don't like the rest of the game very much due to lack of anything interesting happening at all. It always seems that even five-day Test cricket is moving faster than a three-hour baseball game. Pitchers dominate around 75% of play due to the massive help they get from these balls and makes it incredibly difficult for a batter to score. Efforts have been made throughout the years to help balance this a little, such as lowering the height of the pitching mound (another advantage, pitching from a height down at the batter) and allowing advanced bat technology, but it really hasn't helped. In my opinion baseball would be a much more interesting and better game if they used something similar to a cricket ball.

Which substantiates some of the arguement above. I've always fancied the idea of Baseball and would often try and get my mates to play and no-one ever wanted to.
 
Liz Ward said:
If anybody is really interested, I asked the President of the United States Youth Cricket Association http://usyca.org and I found his answer absolutely fascinating. So much so that I thought I would share with you...

Cricket was America's first team sport. Played by colonists and then by the earliest citizens of our new republic, there was a time when it stood alone atop America's games. This fact is attested to by the fact that the first international sporting event was a cricket match between the US and Canada held in New York in 1844. For much of the nineteenth century, cricket and baseball were on an equal footing with the US population. So what happened?

Baseball, ever keen to find a mass market for its product, spent the 1800s tweaking its rules until it developed into a sport that was easy to learn, fun to play and also entertaining to watch. Cricket, on the other hand, stodgily refused to modify itself, mainly out of a combination of classism, arrogance and a misplaced love of "tradition." As a result, baseball became the "national pastime" and cricket became increasingly marginalized in America. By the turn of the century, cricket was a game played only by country club members, mainly in Philadelphia.

The end of the twentieth century has seen cricket revived in North America, mainly due to immigration from the Indian subcontinent and the advent of limited-overs matches. The State Department's Bureau of International Information Programs now estimates there are more than 100,000 active adult cricket players in the US, and that figure climbs every year. The problem is that the ethnic enclaves that embrace cricket tend to be insular and even the leaders of these communities are uncomfortable with being cast as spokespersons for the game to the indigenous population. As a result, cricket in America has had to rely on a constant flow of immigrants to survive, and even now these immigration patterns are slowing. The model, therefore, is not sustainable.

The USYCA mission is to take the game to children in schools, and having introduced the game to them there, to provide opportunities for them to learn the game properly outside of school, with the object being to systematically build an indigenous base of cricket players and fans. We look to the example of American soccer in the early 1970s, which went from an immigrant, niche sport to the mainstream because of its adoption by schools and youth sports organizations. We intend to follow this model, only with more of a focused national vision than did soccer, which developed more organically.

So far, our approach has paid off. In the past year, USYCA has donated over 700 cricket sets to schools in the United States, and because of the USYCA Schools Program, cricket is being played by hundreds of thousands of American schoolchildren. USYCA has also begun the process of creating introductory youth cricket programs, under the auspices of established community sports organizations, for the Summer of 2012.

So, with our grassroots, bottom-up approach, things are changing, but it will take time to see results at the senior level. There's nothing to be gained by rushing the process, though, and much to be eventually gained by doing the job right.
Click to expand...

Sounds good, it may coincide with the emergence of the new format for the one day game that is being trialled, form the little I've read, many of the pro's are talking the new format up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top