The United States is starting to embrace cricket - can we keep nothing sacrosanct?

After a historic win at the T20 World Cup, US cricket is riding high, says Will Gore – maybe too high

Do we really want America to become cricket-mad? (AP)

Cricketing authorities have often seemed ambivalent about the idea of growing the game.

Innovations were for decades greeted with suspicion. Rules for players and spectators were complex and elitist. International tournaments have appeared designed to exclude all but the very top teams.

In this context, the current T20 World Cup is a remarkable advance, featuring as it does a roster of 20 teams – four more than at the last two editions. Papua New Guinea, Oman and Nepal are there, rubbing shoulders with the big beasts of global cricket – India, Australia, England et al. This is just as it should be.

What’s more, the tournament is being co-hosted by one of the sport’s lesser nations, the United States, with matches being played in New York, Florida and Texas – places unused to the joys of leather and willow.

A slight oddity is that the very first international cricket match featured the US taking on Canada, so you might say cricket’s coming home – but no one’s been sufficiently moved to write a song about it, which might be because 99 per cent of Americans have no idea the competition is happening.

Still, following the shock victory of the United States’ side against Pakistan last week, a cricketing consciousness across the Atlantic may be stirring. And such was the dramatic nature of the match – which, having initially ended in a tie, was decided by a “super over” – it is hard to begrudge the Americans their enthusiasm.

But the question then arises: do we really want America to become cricket-mad? The marketing and finance bods at the International Cricket Council would presumably be delighted. Breaking America is not only the holy grail of global pop bands, but also of anyone wanting to make big bucks – and money is these days a major driver of those who run cricket internationally.

That much is evident not only in the sale of broadcasting rights to the highest bidder – and hang the benefits of showing cricket to everyone on free-to-air telly – but also the astonishing rise of T20 franchises around the world over the last two decades.

The Indian Premier League, Australia’s Big Bash, The Hundred in England, and other, similar tournaments have commercialised cricket as never before, and have brought a level of razzmatazz that would have WG Grace and his beard spinning in their grave.

There have been advantages to all this for sure, but cricket’s soul has been troubled. So just imagine what will happen if the Yanks get their hands on the sport. For one thing, it’ll become de rigueur to watch matches accompanied by two-litre sodas and giant foam hands. And such is America’s penchant for cultural imperialism, you can bet your bottom dollar they’ll want to tweak the rules – bigger bats maybe, or perhaps a third set of stumps, just to spice things up a bit. “Leg before wicket” will become “Pants on fire”, and “Howzat” will be replaced with “Whatssup?!”

And if there’s money to be made, Donald Trump will no doubt find a way to get a slice of the pie. He could build a cricket ground at Mar-a-Largo and spend his next presidency telling everyone it’s better than Lord’s. He might even redesignate his title to “The Umpire of the United States of America”. And as he might be in jail, dreaming about ways of getting out will be entirely appropriate.

You might think there is a certain irony in being anxious about American imperialism’s tentacles grabbing hold of cricket, when its initial spread was so closely connected with British colonialism. But that original footprint ultimately created great vibrancy and diversity. The slide towards franchise nonsense has been bad enough without being engulfed by American brashness and business. A full American embrace might just strangle cricket’s soul once and for all.