Outsourcing Cricket in the US

Merchant

Okay, folks. We seem to like talking about the ins and outs of outsourcing, but passions flare because some of the industries involved hit close to home for a few of the posters. Let's try examining the phenomenon using different terms.

The United States is an associate member of the International Cricket Council (ICC), which governs the sport worldwide. As an associate, the US is not authorized to play test cricket, but it does compete in tournaments with other associate members, whose winners often get to play against full members in various regional challenges. Associate members are like the wild card slots in American sports playoffs. A few get to the play with the big boys, but they are usually smashed. It is possible in theory for an associate member to win the Cricket World Cup, since the winner of one of the regional tournaments is given a berth in the opening round.

The US fields a national team. At present, there are no non-immigrant players on it (no white guys). Why is this? America clearly produces the world's best athletes. There is no shortage of physical talent in the US, and we have all the resources to continue to produce superior athletes.

But our national team is staffed by naturalized Americans and a few green-card holders from Jamaica, Trinidad, Guyana, Grenada, Pakistan, India, and few other places. It is dominated by Caribbeans (who are often of Indian descent). These guys grew up playing cricket from the day they were born. They are by no means the best athletes the US could field--many are quite old. Some played test cricket in the Caribbean before immigrating. Most of the guys are over 35; one is even into his 50s. They all play club cricket around the country, organized into regional leagues, with New York, Florida, and Texas holding most of the talent. All of these guys work regular jobs and play cricket on the weekends or on leave for tournaments. In most cases, they have to pay their way.

Outsourcing--cricket in the US has found the group of people most able and most willing to provide the necessary services. They are certainly cheaper than American non-immigrant workers (even AA baseball players make a salary), but they bring a set of cultural intangibles that the market values. In the case, they know and love the game and are willing to sacrifice for it. If you plopped down a ton of money to create a home-grown American cricket league, it would be doomed to fail--just look at the tribulations of professional soccer in the US during the last 30 years.

So the US has a small foothold in the world of cricket because it has outsourced the sport. This doesn't mean that white Americans are lazy or inferior--or that the immigrant players are physically superior (they clearly aren't). It just means that the market has created the conditions whereby these guys provide the most value at the least cost, in a way mutually beneficial to all parties involved.

Rob_The_Pom

If they want to pay me $50000 per year I'll happily out-source my cricketing talents to the US. I have an American grandfather I think that makes me eligible to play.

__________________
The solution to your troubles is at the bottom of a glass

Auntyji

Interesting post, Merchant. It was a surprise (at least to me) that the US is even a member of the ICC.
I work in education and so feel I am a bit cut-off from some issues...outsourcing being one of them (but I read everyone's opinions on the other threads with great interest!).

crvlvr

Great analogy! LOL Many other jobs in th US have already been outsourced in the past. But there have been few complaints, becuase, like in your cricket analogy, there were no american takers for these jobs. The fruit picking, landscaping, pool cleaning etc. etc..