in Search

USA Cricketer

Impress the Americans, not the world

Now, you can get all the USA Cricket updates via Facebook.   Also follow us on Twitter via @dreamcricket

By Tom Melville

With the announced postponement of the long-in-the-works USA T20 league doubts again arise over the perennial claims of the “great market potential” for cricket in North America.

With three years having passed without a ball yet being bowled these doubts are certainly justified and, collectively, they point, with each passing month of inactivity, to the conclusion that CHALLC has squarely run into the (to date) impenetrable wall that has derailed every other effort, in every form or fashion, whether it’s Kiwk Cricket for kids or multi-million dollar cricket leagues, from its self-proclaimed objective of bringing cricket to the American public: namely, coming to terms with the brutal reality that they are not operating in a cricket playing culture.

And despite its reassuring intent to “get things right” with its operations, CHALLC, even at this preliminary stage, has given plenty of evidence it has not done this.

Investors have been promised “top class players”, “ICC support”, and “international standard turf pitches”, all to be packaged as a fully “world class event” second to none in the cricket world.

And, at least on the drawing board, all this may play well with the most discriminating cricket fans from Mumbai to Sydney, and meet the highest ICC standards and expectations. But it doesn’t promise investors the only thing they really need to know; will any of this ever “play in Peoria.”

Not for one moment should it ever be underestimated that one, and only one, thing matters for any cricket venture with pretensions of profitability in America: can a revenue stream be generated for cricket from the mainstream American public, and this means building a business plan firmly on the tastes and customs of America’s own bat & ball culture, not the standards of the wider cricket world. But, to date, CHALLC only seems to be able to dangle before investors little more than reruns of the Lauderhill matches that never resonated with the American public, and, in all probability, matches that will be played without the international caliber players or ICC approved grounds of Lauderhill.

One has to simply wonder: what does CHALLC really have to sell? Anyone buying into a T20 franchise in a cricket playing culture knows they’re guaranteed fans will be in the stands of first class cricket facilities, in front of their TVs, etc. With its home grown T20 competition CHALLC can’t guarantee its investors much more than the “good old college try” since the hoards of anticipated American cricket fans exist, right now, only in imagination (unless CHALLC views as its “core constituency”--in the words of Gary Hopkins--the North American ex-pat community, in which case it would have to scale back its revenue projections from millions to thousands of dollars).

Personally, I believe the whole IPL “business model”—a full blown, multi-team, competition concentrated over a very short time span—is the wrong one for promoting cricket to Americans. Much preferable, and certainly more time tested, would be the course followed by the NFL in Europe; single, highly-focused, carefully planned, games with their public response scrupulously evaluated and monitored before moving forward in careful, incremental, steps. The NFL didn’t take the plunge of setting up a full-blown European league until it showed it could sell out Wembley Stadium. CHALLC is basically turning all this on its head, jumping headlong into a full-fledged league before it has shown it can sell a single ticket to Americans.

Looking at it this way, CHALLC, at its present stage of operation, is hardly more than a crapshoot, with potential investors being asked to pony up millions for franchises and grounds backed solely by the unverified collateral that organizers somehow, someway, have the wherewithal to sell cricket to the American public in a big, big, way.

(Tom Melville is an American cricket player, teacher, and author of Cricket For Americans and The Tented Field: A History of Cricket in America. He’s been working with Americans at cricket for over thirty years.   Opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.)

Comments

 

Jamie said:

Tom, while I wholeheartedly agree with your "cart before the horse" analysis of professional USA T20 ventures, I deeply resent the characterization of efforts such as USYCA's (which I infer from your reference to "Kwik cricket for kids") as having been "derailed."

While our accomplishments have not come without great effort and determination, it is the height of ignorance to say that the fact that America is not yet a cricket-playing culture has been impenetrable wall - at least for USYCA.

Our programs have been wildly successful in bringing our game to hundreds of thousands of American children, and now new junior programs and leagues are sprouting up throughout the country.

Yes, the top end may be treading water, but us here working our asses off at the grassroots are doing just fine, thank you very much.

February 6, 2013 6:17 PM
 

timmyj51 said:

Think you're being a little touchy, Jamie.  There's been dozens of  attempts

to bring Kiwk Cricket into schools over the years that haven't succeeded (Malcolm

Nash probably the best known). Why do you assume he's referring to

your program?  And I think your claim to being "wildly successfull" is rather

premature.  You've introduced tons of kids to cricket.  But this is only the very

first step, and a step that all these other Kiwk programs did just as well.  

February 7, 2013 9:56 AM
 

Jamie said:

Timmy/Tim, I know that playing Negative Nellie is your thing, but by any objective measurement, USYCA's Schools Cricket Program has exceeded all expectations, many times over. (1,500 schools to date.) So, yes, we've been "wildly successful" in bringing cricket to schools, although it's impossible to compare us with anyone else, since no other Kwik-cricket type program has ever attempted anything on such a scale. Ever.

One thing you're right about is that this is just the first step, and I'm pleased to report that USYCA is already seeing success in the next stage, which is new junior programs and leagues.

Of course, I'm sure that you will find some way to dismiss this and all future successes, as these undercut your permanent argument that there is no hope for cricket in America.

Luckily for us, your opinions, while entertaining, influence no one.

February 7, 2013 12:17 PM
 

timmyj51 said:

Need to reign in your ego Jamie.  It's not good for the game. This is America, everyone who gets involved in cricket is going to run into plenty of criticism and

skepticism.  If you're  just going to lash out at every criticism, imagined (as you

did with the Melville guy) or real it's going to be an unpleasant road for you.  Someone

claims "success" at the end, not the beginning, of an undertaking.  I suppose

you could say just introducting tons of kids to cricket is "wildly successfull" though,

as I've said, many, many, other people have done this. Maybe not on your scale,

but it's what happens after Kwik Cricket that matters.   Maclolm Nash, in his program, was

able to organize a hard-ball team of Americans and even played a game with a

Canadian team. So far, I don't see a single American kid from your program

has advanced to this stage.  After you've managed that, and only after, you can maybe

claim success.

February 7, 2013 12:43 PM
 

Jamie said:

LOL. At least now I know that it is someone who has no involvement in cricket whatsoever, rather than the actual grassroots volunteers doing the work, who ultimately decides at what point I can consider USYCA's achievements to be a success!

Good to know!

February 7, 2013 12:57 PM
 

roger said:

Tom wrote "...the conclusion that CHALLC has squarely run into the (to date) impenetrable wall that has derailed every other effort, in every form or fashion...", this certainly seems to be pointed at everybody who has ever tried to advance cricket in the USA. This would definitely include USYCA.

And I think when an organisation such as USYCA, with a plan which would take many many years to accomplish, must have both short and long term goals. Saying that they can't claim any form of success until the long term goals have been met is pretty laughable.

February 7, 2013 5:53 PM
 

timmyj51 said:

Jamie, curious to know (as many other people are):  how much experience to

YOU YOURSELF have playing cricket?  How many years have you been playing?

What clubs, what teams?  And I mean out in the middle, playing a full

game, batting, bowling, fielding?  If someone's trying to get America to enjoy

'the pleasures of playing cricket would expect him to speak from direct experienice.

February 8, 2013 10:21 AM
 

Jamie said:

Timmy/Tim,

My direct experience comes from introducing thousands of American children to cricket and watching them fall in love with the game.

My direct experience comes from spending hundreds of hours tossing a soft ball to youngsters learning how to use a cricket bat.

My direct experience comes from working with dozens of enthusiastic volunteers all over America who are spreading our great game where it has never gone before.

My direct experience comes form helping people and organizations share with young people their love for cricket.

So there you have it.

Apologies in advance if my "direct experiences" do not measure up on the "Timmy Scale." I'll do my best to carry on anyway.

February 8, 2013 12:28 PM

DreamCricket strongly disapproves of spam and we appreciate your taking the time to report this abuse to us so we can remove it accordingly. If you find any content or comments to be inappropriate, abusive or infringing other people's copyright please report it. To report abuse, please email us at content@dreamcricket.com.

This Blog

Syndication

Tags