true most countries have their #1 sport then another maybe somewhat popular sport but look at USA. Baseball, football, basketball, hockey, a couple of others ........then soccer. Most other countries have soccer then another.
I'm not arguing that. What I am arguing is your claim that Americans' lack of knowledge of cricket is a result of ethnocentrism. The reason Americans don't know about cricket is because we have zero exposure of any kind to cricket in the first place. It's impossible to develop a curiosity about something you're barely aware even exists.
A lot of people are very confused about this particular issue. They claim that the "World Series" is proof-positive of USA's claims of world dominance. Actually, it has nothing to do with that. The name "World Series" comes from the original sponsor of the competition -- the New York World newspaper. The newspaper went defunct but the name stuck.
Are you kidding me? We were just talking before how many Americans refuse to accept "soccer" because it is foreign, many are quick to dimiss and understand it even, the same goes for a lot of things, the same goes for cricket. You're making it seem as if its such an obscure thing, because it's not. Exposure or not, Americans should still have somewhat of an understanding of it or at least be aware of its existence
Well that explains it very well but it stills makes Americans look cocky u know calling it the WORLD SERIES when well it has nothing to do with the world but since most of the world doesnt know where the name oriented from like me 5 minutes ago it just makes it seem COCKY you know? But there is the first BASEBALL WORLD CUP coming up in march 2006 so guess thats their pathetic attempt to come close to the WORLD CUP the real original one
Let me help you here: Besides having no exposure, Cricket is extremely boring to watch...well so is Baseball (at least for me, being non-American) but Cricket is much worse. I've played Cricket a couple of times and it's a lot of fun (way easier than Baseball, everybody can play it) and I've tried to watch it which is infinately boring (1 game takes 5 days and they are usually ties).
Well, anything can be exciting to watch if you're interested in it. Why do you think so many people around the world watch televised golf? Personally I like playing golf, but I'd rather spend the day pulling every hair off of my body with a pair of tweezers than watch televised golf, and I have two brothers who are positive fanatics about it. (And they make fun of ME for watching soccer!) But I like to joke about cricket -- there is one major difference between cricket and baseball. The average baseball game lasts about three hours. The average cricket match lasts about three months.
Around here it sure is. Other than the internet, name me one single place in the USA where a layman is likely to gain any sort of exposure to the sport? And, secondly, if you're claiming Americans dislike cricket because it's foreign, then you really have to give any reason whatsoever why Americans should develop any more of a curiosity for cricket than they would for any other sport or activity. Americans dislike soccer because they perceive it as foreign. Americans don't dislike cricket especially -- they just don't know a damned thing about it.
What about all those high funded commercial coming on TV at all times of the hours and all the celebrity appereances at the actual games with all the other things???
Only to the ignorant. If the first sponsor of the competition had been the New York Post, we'd be talking today about the Post Series.
Its not that Americans should like the sport, I could care less but don't you think they should be aware of it? as they should of many other things but they don't because they don't necessarily believe it will have any effect on their lives whether they do or not, and that's fine. I however have a firm belief that one should be aware about everything regardless of personal significance, don't you think one would be better off if they do?
has anyone seen whit stillman's "barcelona"? well there is this really interesting scene where the american consul uses "an ant colony" to explain anti-americanism... i think it applies to the question: why isn't soccer big in the states. i think a huge chunk of it is that the mainstream media, in particular sports writers sort of weigh in on the whole debate over globalization in regards to soccer. america is sort of seen as the predominant force behind globablization, but in fact, domestically, we have our own debates over its benefits and drawbacks. that is sort of reflected in soccer. soccer, or football - if you must, is something that is foreign to our shores and something that the media and others who dwell on their own "american-ness" can point to and criticize. just that fact that its so different from our other sports and isn't as well rooted in our popular culture makes it an easy scapegoat and target for people who really don't understand what's going on in the rest of the world or how it affects us as americans. soccer is something that is different that is easy to point fun at and ridicule. this might sound simplistic, but at some level, i just think the media pokes fun at soccer because its different and opposing soccer has become a marker of the true blue america, a sign of the resistance. particularly in light of the fact that soccer is seen as a suburban sport, opposition to soccer is just another way to establish class differentiations. i guess this is my long-winded way of saying: i don't think there is anything about americans that makes us reluctant to embrace soccer. its probably just a symptom of the way the media covers it and the way soccer sort of stands for other things in the american mind. seriously? all we need to do is wait for the media to declare soccer cool in the future. the media is pretty wishy-washy and once they get on board, i think the rest of the mindless tv watching public will too.
Beyond knowing that it exists, as pretty much all Americans actually do, what reason do Americans have for knowing anything about it? I mean, seriously, most Americans don't even know that there's such an entity as the Major Indoor Lacrosse League. Do you think they have some sort of obligation to know that the MILL exists? And that's a sport that was invented here.
the parallel between the MILL and cricket is totally off, we're talking about a world-wide known and historic sport such as cricket and the MILL, I think you're smart enough to make the distinction there and draw the line. As I said before, the first step in accepting something is knowing it, with soccer for example, there is a chance that americans can like it if they actually know more about it or understand it, or in this case at least be aware of it, so they won't refute it right away, as that is the norm now. I'm not saying Americans should like cricket, those who have heard the name or seen some pictures are quick to dismiss it for stupid reasons however, if they would actually gain further insight on it, they should at least be able to hesitate from such judgments.
sorry, I hate to burst your self-righteous bubble but that's a total myth. http://www.snopes.com/business/names/worldseries.asp It was just hype, plain and simple. Ragardless of whether the NFL etc call their champions "world champions", I don't really think that has anything to do with the lack of popularity of the sports worldwide. People everywhere just like the sports they grew up with. The strange thing with the US has always been the hostility to the sport, compared with the indifference encountered elsewhere.
So you are saying that all those 3rd world countries people are ignorant people whent the see WORLD series they think well why are Americans calling it the world series when its the domestic league??? Do they think they are better than everybody even in sports that they can call a US competition the WORLD SERIES.....well thats what its called so people assume including Americans cause i bet most americans do not know that it could have been the POST series for that reason so......
See, i believe that american's lack of knowledge of cricket (cricket, unfortunately, being of course the tip of the iceberg) is due to ethnocentrism. For instance, you claim a lack of exposure to cricket is the main factor for your ignorance; well, to the best of my knowledge, baseball is not shown on television in my country, i have never played baseball, watched a game of baseball or met anyone that was a fan, but i know a fair bit about it and its rules. I would venture to suggest that cricket is played by far more people worldwide than baseball and the U.S public's ignorance of it could easily be attributed to an ethnocentric media and a public that is too quick to dismiss what they barely understand
Gambling in the game is what helped its awareess in a lot of countries. But perhaps it was too easy to fix games.
I never doubted that... but the claim that the rest of the world only cares for soccer is wrong, we just don't care about US sports Fair enough, I think I heard it before... it's still confusing, and you can't expect that a European who doesn't care about the sport knows that, I guess the average American would not know that neither... And Cricket is only big in commonwealth countries, I mean I have never seen a game, leave alone knowing the rules. The only thing I know is that it is similair to Baseball (which it propably isn't)
What a flawed theory. So how do you explain more soccer fields in American than baseball fileds? More Kids playing Soccer than Baseball? I guess we have Commies at work here! PS: One of the few Commies left is Cuba so should America drop Basbeall cause Cuba loves Baseball. People in America "disliked" soccer before Communism...the reason why Soccer is not Americas favorite sport is because Baseball started early here in the mid 1800's and caught on before soccer did. And so did Football etc....
Rediculous statement. Brazilians are also lost when it comes to cricket!! Im sure many nations are!! While I agree Americans tend to have the reputation of being less "international" to say they take no interest in "anything foreign" is not true. Americans love eating foreign food...Chinese, Italian, Mexican just to name a few...Americans Love foreign cars....Americans Loves traveilng overseas.... I sincerly think America is roughly split in 2... Joe Six Pack/ Nascar-NFL-Baseball fan/ Bushie / Soccer hater and the more culturaly advanced American with good common sense. With exceptions of course.
Cricket is harder than baseball for a number of reasons. 1)The bowler (aka pitcher) is allowed to aim at the body and head of the batter. 2)The cricket ball is made of harder material then a baseball .and is therefore harder to catch and field. see here 3)fielding team in cricket cant wear catching gloves (apart from the wicket keeper) .which means most catches are bare hand. 4)the game is longer which can make it physically tougher . and there are other reasons I could list ,but I wont digress from the subject.. as for the topic... USA media always focuses on "diving" and "play-acting" in soccer .They try and make out that its a sport for pu$$ies who fake injuries .When you watch a team like Real Betis than its easy to see why some people laugh at the diving .But they gotta realise its a sport which is marked by instant referee decision and no video replay . Some teams like to bend the rules .If american football teams didnt have to play with video replays than the teams would obviously try to bend the rules and try and con the umpires .