Roger L Simon links to a fascinating NY Times article on cricket and why it seems to have caught on almost everywhere in the former British empire except North America - where apparently it did catch on but was supplanted by roundersbaseball. Curiously the article suggests that the reason why boils down to marketing:
Cricket lost ground in North America because of the egalitarian ethos of its societies. Rich Americans and Canadians had constant anxiety about their elite status, which prompted them to seek ways to differentiate themselves from the masses. One of those ways was cricket, which was cordoned off as an elites-only pastime, a sport only for those wealthy enough to belong to expensive cricket clubs committed to Victorian ideals of sportsmanship. In late 19th-century Canada, according to one historian, "the game became associated more and more with an older and more old-fashioned Anglo-Saxon elite."
This elite appropriation played into the hands of baseball entrepreneurs who actively worked to diminish cricket's popularity. A. G. Spalding, described in the Baseball Hall of Fame as the "organizational genius of baseball's pioneer days," was typical. "I have declared cricket is a genteel game," he mocked in "America's National Game," his 1911 best seller. "It is. Our British cricketer, having finished his day's labor at noon, may don his negligee shirt, his white trousers, his gorgeous hosiery and his canvas shoes, and sally forth to the field of sport, with his sweetheart on one arm and his cricket bat under the other, knowing that he may engage in his national pastime without soiling his linen or neglecting his lady."
Baseball, in contrast, was sold as a rugged, fast-paced, masculine game, befitting a rugged, fast-paced economic power. Americans of all classes swallowed the chauvinistic line. It was also great business for Spalding. By inventing elaborate baseball gear and paraphernalia, he created a market for his new sporting-goods company.
On the other hand outside of N America cricket was marketed to the natives as a good idea - soothing the savage breast etc. - by the British ruling classes. Hence the difference. It is interesting to see that Baseball has been a reasonably successful export by America to nations that were in its sphere of interest such as Korea, Japan and Cuba.
On a similar note one might wonder why Association Football has conquered the world while Rugby remains a minor sport and its relative American Football has generally failed to spread beyond North America. It does occur to me that N American sports do seem to need more equipment than other ones and that might explain why they don't catch on as well. American football seems to require helmets and armour, not to mention, along with rugby some fairly complicated goal posts whereas soccer just needs a ball. Any suitable pair of sticks, garage door or pile of discarded clothing works for the goal. Cricket is not much more complicated as any number of summer beaches in England demonstrate, one cricket bat is just about all the special equipment required. A proper wicket is a nice idea but I recall playing with a wicket made of driftwood and using a tennis ball instead of a cricket ball.
To go back to the article, which points out that cricket could be a great way for the natives to get their own back on the British, it does occur to me that until the recent semi-success of soccer very few N American sportsmen have had a chance to play their sport for an overseas team or to compete in a real world championship against teams from other countries. I do wonder whether the Americans haven't lost something by not having a game that they share a passion for with the rest of the world and particularly not having one that they can lose at. Could the prevalent anti-Americanism seen around the world be partly due to the way that America doesn't play or get worked up about the sports that the rest of us do? [and yes this is a broad generalization and ignores the fact that some US sports are indeed played internationally but (for example) neither Basketball nor Ice-hockey are major sports on a global scale the way that cricket and football are].