How America escaped being a cricketing country

by S. Pathiravitana

Two social scientists from Harvard, Professor Patterson and Associate Professor Kaufman, researching on cricket, yes, cricket, have put forward the view that the US escaped being a cricketing country because those who introduced it first were a bit snooty. They made it an elites-only pastime, ‘a sport only for those wealthy enough’ to belong to exclusive clubs.
That ‘quintessential English game,’ as they called it, however, retained a bit of ‘quintessential’ feudalism in it, so much so, rich Americans and Canadians ‘had constant anxiety about their elite status, which prompted them to seek ways to differentiate themselves from the masses.’

In other words the elites didn’t want to hob-nob with the plebs. This was evident, I must say, to some extent even in the class-ridden English society of England, too, where an annual cricket match played between the ‘Gentlemen’ of English cricket and their social inferiors known as the ‘Players,’ lasted as recently as 1963 and only then discontinued. Up to that time the ‘Players’ could enter the MCC pavilion only from the rear entrance reserved for tradesmen, the front was reserved only for ‘Gentlemen.’

History tells us that cricket had a different beginning in the United States when it was established in the 18th century. Then it had the blessings right from the top with men like George Washington following the game with keen interest. There were a number of cricket clubs in the fledgling days of the American Republic and it is said that in 1780 John Adams, the second President of the USA, argued in the Congress that if the leaders of the cricket clubs could be called Presidents there was no reason why the first man of this democratic nation should not carry that name. In 1840, the first international Test match between two countries, America and Canada, took place in Bloomingdale Park in New York watched by a crowd of 20,000. Neither England nor Australia can boast of such history.

As the old animosities died down after America freed itself from the colonial grip of Britain, teams of cricketers from some of the elite cricket clubs in the States came to play friendly matches in England. Had these friendly visits continued, America may have become even a greater rival in cricket than Australia. There was the case of a cricketer from Philadelphia, where cricket rooted better, whose performances on the English tours were truly staggering. He was J. Barton ‘Bart’ King, regarded “as one of the greatest cricketers never to play at Test cricket.” On his tour of England in 1908 he took the most wickets during that season averaging 11.1 for a total of 115. His other achievements on that tour were to take more than ten wickets per innings three time and nine wickets per innings eight times.

On an earlier tour in 1897 playing against a full strength Sussex team, which included the great ‘Ranji,’ K.S.Ranjitsinhji, he took seven wickets for ten runs bowling the ‘Prince of cricket’ with his first ball. In his last two international matches, against the 1912 Australians, King, now nearly 40 years old, took 9 for 78 and 8 for 74. King was equally good with his bat scoring 133 not out and 98 against Surrey on his 1903 tour. All in all his performance as an allrounder is truly incredible scoring 2623 runs in all first class matches with a highest score of 344 and taking 529 wickets on an average of 12.48. About him it has been said, “He ranks as one of the finest - and sadly the most overlooked - all-rounders to grace the game.”

The man who did the most to discredit cricket in America was A.G.Spalding, himself a baseball player who made a fortune in marketing this game. The book he wrote on the subject of America’s National Game was utterly chauvinist and succeeded in turning the American mind towards baseball. “Base Ball,” he wrote, “is the American Game par excellence because its playing demands Brain and Brawn, and American manhood supplies these ingredients in quantity sufficient to spread over the entire continent.” That was what he rubbed in, but he also got some points across, “But Cricket would never do for Americans; it is too slow. It takes two and sometimes three days to complete a first-class Cricket match; but two hours of Base Ball is quite sufficient to exhaust both players and spectators. “An Englishman is so constituted by nature that he can wait three days for the result of a Cricket match; while two hours is about as long as an American can wait for the close of a Base Ball game - or anything else, for that matter. The best Cricket team ever organized in America had its home in Philadelphia—and remained there. Cricket does not satisfy the red-hot blood of Young or Old America.”

There were additional reasons for the decline of American cricket. As mentioned earlier the cricket clubs that were formed in the 19th century remained elitist and never developed the professional side of the game. When baseball appeared on the scene some cricket clubs gave up cricket and turned their attention to golf and tennis. Others seeing baseball as an additional entertainment sponsored the first baseball teams. Spalding’s arguments were not the only reason for America turning away from cricket.

The Imperial Cricket Conference, as it was known before it changed into the present International Cricket Conference, took a parochial view with regard to the world wide development of cricket, when it decided in 1908 to confine its activities to only the then British Empire. But with the British Empire coming apart soon after World War II, the ICC turned wiser and opened its membership to countries as diverse as Namibia, Papua New Guinea, Holland and Canada. It was then that the United States of America Cricket Association became a member of the ICC and the year was 1965. Ever since it has competed in the cricket tourneys held by the ICC in regional areas, as drawn up by the ICC. It has not done anything remarkable in any of the cricket tourneys held by the ICC in its forty years as a member. It has a long way to go to reach Test status and take part in the World Cup.

Yet there is hope as this news report reveals: “For the first time in cricket history, the Americans had won the International Cricket Council’s Six Nations Challenge, a tournament designed to pick the best of international cricket’s second tier, by the most slender of margins. More importantly, the United States had finally arrived as a cricketing nation after 160 years of playing the sport.”

The curious thing about America’s win at the Sharjah tourney in 2004 was that of the 14-member team that participated in that game only one was born in America, and he happened to be of Pakistani parentage; the rest were all immigrants from the Caribbean and the Indian sub continent. Another curious thing is that, beginning with the English who were the first immigrants to take to cricket, it has now been taken up by other immigrants like the West Indians, the Pakistanis and the Indians. The rest of America doesn’t seem to be interested in cricket.

The latest news is that the ICC has just appointed an official to visit America, not exactly to change that situation, but more to “serve our existing niche of cricket fans in America.” And what is he taking with him to America to do that? Not Test cricket, but that shorter game known as Twenty 20 with which the ICC, I presume, hopes to give a good run eventually to that other shorter game which is very popular in the States - baseball.