The Cricket World Cup is arguably the biggest event on the sport's calendar. Taking place once every four years since 1975, it pits 16 of the world's best squads head-to-head in a month-and-a-half long tournament similar to FIFA's own World Cup.
But while the Cricket World Cup has long been a massively popular sporting event around the world, the event has barely registered a minor blip in American sports consciousness. Yet, with the news that ESPN is covering the event and giving it the kind of treatment only the Worldwide Leader can provide, one must ask: can they make the U.S. care about this crazy sport, with bouncing pitches, wickets and googlies?
And on the surface, things certainly don't look good. With no American team in the tournament in 2011, it shows just how far behind the rest of the world the United States is in this English sport. Americans, like most people on Earth, are much more inclined to care about a sport if we're taking part in it's marquee event, not sitting at home during it.
Add to that confusing rules, an odd field and matches that can last for even longer than a Yankees-Red Sox telecast (no small feat, mind you) and you've got a recipe for Americans not to pay attention.
But, look again. This is the network that made us all care about darts in it's early days, and more recently, has found gems in the World's Strongest Man competition (turn on ESPN2 almost any day and you'll probably find it on at some point) and the World Series of Poker. They find this success by treating new sports as though they're already loved, informing us of the rules and strategy without making us feel like idiots. Once they've done that, ESPN loves to hit us with more advanced analysis for those who've gotten hooked on the sport, keeping our newfound appetite for it satiated.
Can they do it again with cricket? Maybe, maybe not. But with all the successes they've had with less internationally popular sports, can we bet against them?
But while the Cricket World Cup has long been a massively popular sporting event around the world, the event has barely registered a minor blip in American sports consciousness. Yet, with the news that ESPN is covering the event and giving it the kind of treatment only the Worldwide Leader can provide, one must ask: can they make the U.S. care about this crazy sport, with bouncing pitches, wickets and googlies?
And on the surface, things certainly don't look good. With no American team in the tournament in 2011, it shows just how far behind the rest of the world the United States is in this English sport. Americans, like most people on Earth, are much more inclined to care about a sport if we're taking part in it's marquee event, not sitting at home during it.
Add to that confusing rules, an odd field and matches that can last for even longer than a Yankees-Red Sox telecast (no small feat, mind you) and you've got a recipe for Americans not to pay attention.
But, look again. This is the network that made us all care about darts in it's early days, and more recently, has found gems in the World's Strongest Man competition (turn on ESPN2 almost any day and you'll probably find it on at some point) and the World Series of Poker. They find this success by treating new sports as though they're already loved, informing us of the rules and strategy without making us feel like idiots. Once they've done that, ESPN loves to hit us with more advanced analysis for those who've gotten hooked on the sport, keeping our newfound appetite for it satiated.
Can they do it again with cricket? Maybe, maybe not. But with all the successes they've had with less internationally popular sports, can we bet against them?
