| Date | Match | Result | |
|
|
| | 16th June | 1st Test | AUS by 2 wickets | | 28th June | 2nd Test | AUS by 43 runs | | 6th July | 3rd Test | ENG by 3 wickets | | 19th July | 4th Test | Draw | | 27th July | 5th Test | |
| Date | Match | Result | |
|
|
| | 22nd June | Only Test | AUS by 89 runs | | 2nd July | First T20I | AUS by 4 wickets | | 6th July | Second T20I | ENG by 3 runs | | 9th July | Third T20I | ENG by 5 wickets | | 12th July | First ODI | ENG by 2 wickets | | 16th July | Second ODI | AUS by 3 runs | | 18th July | Third ODI | ENG by 69 runs (DLS) |
Series drawn - AUS retain the Ashes
Did you mean to link to a news article or something? This is lacking context.
Anyway, the only thing I know about American cricket is that there’s a team called the Manhattan Yorkers, which is just the most perfect name there has ever been for a sporting team anywhere.
@Zagorath I did include the link, emergingcricket.com/insight/un… I'm not sure why it wouldn't be showing on your end.
Interesting. Looks like you're on Friendica, not Lemmy? I'm guessing the two use incompatible methods of transmitting links. Because what you've posted comes across as a text post with a title and a text body "I always want to side". That's it. No link.
Woah, US cricket sounds way more developed than i thought!
I want the game to be successful in the States so bad, but it feels like every chance they get those in power seem to screw it up. I suspect they are just incompetent, but sometimes it feels deliberate.
What is the driving force behind your enthusiasm to have cricket adopted by the US in particular?
A quick note on the way i see it. Cricket is one of the few big sports, especially now F1 is gone, that doesn't have to cater to the worlds largest sporting market. The introduction of the USA into a sport comes with target market variation for the sport. Usually, (i stress usually, i'm sure not always), in the USA's case that means more commercialisation of the form of entertainment. Is that something current crucket fans would be happy with?
A counter to this i can think of immediately, however, is India is such a dominant market for cricket already, it could be a large enough status quo force to counter the preferences influence of the tantalising USA market.
I agree but also on a simpler level:
We're bloody good at it and the last thing we want is some yanks with all their money just paying their way to victory. Kind of like the Olympics.
But also this is cricket we're talking about here: a sport that is more about strategy and technicality than it is about action (NFL, Basketball, Baseball). I just don't think the US mainstream audience is interested in that kind of stuff. I can't imagine trying to sell test cricket to the US mainstream
"We're bloody good at it" Hahaha, yeah that to!
Thats what i imagine would happen, sans influence of the Indian market, test cricket is a game, not an necessarily aimed at the nightly entertainment window, twenty-twenty is already a compromise without the US on board. I can only imagine a Futurama type scenario, (but for cricket not baseball), if the US came on board. Good ol'Blernsball.
In saying that, baseball can go on for a fair few hours. When i went to a game we were there for like two or three hours and the game went on for another hour after we left to pick a friend up from the airport. Listened to the rest on the radio.
especially now F1 is gone
what do you mean F1 is gone? I've never heard an American talk about Formula 1 unless there was an alien in the conversation. It's NASCAR or nothing.
Refer to my answer below. Haha, yeah i's probably being a little overblown in the description.
But, your coming at the discussion from a US markets perspective, (totally understandable as you have explained). I'm coming at the discussion from an Australian market perspective, (note, i'm not trying to claim you're not Aussie, i don't know, i'm only refering to the arguments perspective).
The US is a huge sports market, with a lot of cash. A small change in US sports market preferences can be perceived as a huge change from the Australian markets perspective.
For example, if 7 state teams were to start a competition in the US, well thats basically another australia, but its not even 1/5 of the US.
Its a horrendous example, but i'm thinking of it off the top of my head. It was either this example, or some tortured kayak and cruise liner analogy.
@Gorgritch_umie_killa because I like being able to watch and talk about cricket and I live in America. Most of my friends are American. Most of them aren't going to go out of their way to find a way to watch cricket, like paying >$100 a month for Satellite TV, and then an additional $10 a month to get Willow, the only channel I'm aware of that broadcasts Cricket in America.
Fair play. Are there any local competitions there? I know Aussie rules has a promotional organisation called Auskick. They do a lot of promo inside Australia, but have been known to do Aussie rules football outside Australia as well.
Maybe AusCricket could do the same, if they don't already, and go over to some US schools, could be a way to prokote a grass roots competition. Or just LA galaxy the sport and bring in a few big names to kickstart a top down pro-comp.
There's two "National" T20 leagues, "minor league Cricket" & "Major Leauge Cricket" (taking names from Baseball's MLB & its MiLB "farm system" hoping to get recognition from Americans). Many teams, particularly Thos in MLC are owned by the IPL and promoted only to the Sub-continent Diaspora. In my experience similarly the local games is organized for Indians. We had tried to sign my daughter up to play youth cricket a few towns away, the entry form had "preferred language" which included a bunch I had never heard of, and none of them was English. After we went to the first meeting my daughter decided she didn't want to play (I hope its not so, but the fact there were no other white girls might have had something to do with her decision).
go over to some US schools.
yes, in the States Public education and sporting are tightly connected. To get Cricket to take a hold LONG TERM, it needs to be a requirement for Gym Teachers to know before they graduate from college. Then they can teach it in schools and, hopefully, get area schools to sponsor teams.
Or just LA galaxy the sport
Even before MLS (Major League Soccer) got started Youth Soccer existed nationwide. In bigger cities High School & college teams already existed long before. Three had been several other attempts at Pro Soccer leagues, and the '68-'84 North American Soccer League (NASL) did a whole lot more "top down" than MLS ever did (The New York Cosmos paying Pele $1.67 million a year in 1975, when the top Major League Baseball Players where making $150,000) NASL didn't last, but then again I've heard that the GenXers who grew up watching NASL where the one' for whom Youth Soccer was set up, and who continued to ensure it grew, so maybe you are right?
Although many Americans still consider soccer a sport for "little kids" or "foreigners" MLS has higher attendance than NBA (National Basketball Association) & NHL (National Hockey League), last I checked, ranking 4th behind NFL (National Football League), NASCAR (National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing) and MLB. (Though they still talk as though there are only 4 sports: American Football, Baseball, Basketball & Ice Hockey)
Cheers! Yeah, i suppose these things can take a long time to take root. A couple false starts doesn't always sound the death knell.
especially now F1 is gone
What does this mean? I don't follow car racing, but I feel like I would have heard about it if the biggest form of the sport disappeared completely?
Haha! Not gone like that. I meant the F1's have only re-entered the US market, with actual Grand Prix's, in the last few years. And it seems more permanent this time.
Therefore read 'gone' as 'gone into the US'