Selling Cricket to Baseball Fans – An Investor Presentation

(Click on the slide to enlarge)

Also Read:
How to Sell Cricket to the Baseball Fans

How to Sell Cricket to the Baseball World

Though there are some similarities between cricket and baseball, the primary playing nations are almost mutually exclusive. While cricket is limited to England and a handful of the former British colonies, baseball has always been popular in Canada, the Caribbean, Japan, Netherlands, South Korea, and the United States. Thus far, the marketing efforts to expand cricket into the major baseball nations have been marginally successful. Even when an exhibition cricket match is played in the US, the audience is mostly the immigrants from the cricketing countries, making it commercially unviable to attract any significant TV channel to carry it live.

For cricket to be a viable alternative to baseball in major baseball nations, it has to be a lot more entertaining to the viewers. While the cricket fans consider the shortened T-20 format very fun, it's not so for their baseball counterparts. The baseball lovers will still find it quite "boring."

The only way cricket can be sold to the major baseball world is by reinventing the format itself. The two-innings design is fundamentally backward-bending from the entertainment perspective, offering little to virtually no incentives to the commercial media in the all-baseball world. More often than not, this format makes an on-going match far too predictable, thus destroying the fun and thrill. For example, when the team batting first collapses or even performs sub-par, the outcome is more or less predictable. So, who would stick around for the second inning? Not the TV viewers, at least – which is the primary viewership.

Therefore, a more entertaining and thrilling T-20 format needs to be invented and tried in the baseball world. If it becomes successful there, it would be equally, if not more, successful at home.

   

Once this new T-20 format gains commercial momentum, virtual sports makers will quickly jump in, taking it to the next level, where viewers can virtually play along "live." The Virtual 2.0 will be AI-friendly, allowing the virtual batters to try out different "timing" and "striking" options which the actual on-field batter could only wish. Similarly, the virtual bowlers will be able to try out various "line" and "length" options, which, again, the actual on-field bowler could only wish.

So, how to reinvent and sell cricket to the baseball world? Here it is:

1. The New Format will Comprise eight innings. In terms of the number of overs, the new format will continue to share the T-20 (i.e., 20-overs) design. But, instead of the existing 2-innings format, the new format will be split up into four batting innings per side (5 overs per inning) to a total of 8 innings, thus allowing each team to bat for four rotating innings, meaning the team that opens the batting will return to bat out the 3rd, 5th, and 7th innings, respectively. The same team will take the bowling/fielding for the alternate 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 8th innings, respectively, when the opponent bats. The problem of the one-batting-inning per side is that the match often becomes far too predictable early into the second inning; for instance, if the side batting first does not put up enough runs on the board, the match becomes entirely predictable within 5 to 7 overs into the second inning – to the utter dismay of the attending fans and the media audiences at large.

2. The New Format will Comprise One Set of Batting Wickets. Unlike in all traditional cricket formats, one set of batting wickets will be used so only one batter can bat at a time. The advantage of having only one batter at a time is that the batting momentum will continue, keeping the entertainment ante significantly up, which is critical for the new format to garner an audience. In the traditional design, since two batters bat together, the game's entertainment aspect often gets compromised. Generally, when one batter goes on a scoring spree, the other slows down, playing a more supporting or defensive role (except in death overs), which could be technically acceptable, but generally at the expense of the entertainment value of the game. Having one batter at a time removes the potential of the second batter slowing down altogether. 

3. Each Batter and Bowler Gets One Over per Inning. Under the new format, each batter gets to bat only one over per inning, with the mandatory introduction of all five new batters in consecutive innings. Of course, when the first five batters do not survive until the end of the fifth, the inning ends, thus preventing the bowlers from sacrificing their wickets to pave the way for the specialist batters. Simply put, the five batters from inning one can be repeated in inning three, while the five batters from inning two can be repeated in inning four. Similarly, bowlers can bowl only one over per inning, with the mandatory introduction of all five new bowlers in consecutive innings. Therefore, the bowling side will reintroduce the five bowlers from inning one into inning three and the five bowlers from their second innings into innings four. This general one-over batting and bowling restrictions will force teams to recruit more all-around cricketers than specialists, lessening the game's usual predictability. A team can use a dedicated wicket-keeper across all four innings, for now (this practice may also be dispensed with down the road, making way for more unpredictability).

4. Scoring Runs will require Returning to the Base. Scoring (non-boundary) runs in this format will be very different from all forms of traditional cricket. Batters must return to the Base (batting crease) to be credited for any runs, making the conventional singles (1's) and threes (3's) off-limit. Of course, boundaries and over-boundaries, in line with the traditional forms, will remain in force. In other words, the batters can only hit 2's and 4's (maximum per bowl) by returning to the Base. Therefore, the elimination of singles and threes will require more precise hits and placements and enhanced judgment and athleticism. To minimize inaccurate bowling and imprecise throws, regular wide balls, no-balls, byes, and leg byes will be allowed, adding runs to the batting side.

5. The Existing Batter Dismissal Rules will Continue, for now. Until this new format gains meaningful commercial momentum, any further and specialized technology will not be forthcoming. Therefore, using the existing DRS and related technology will force this format to continue with the current batter dismissal rules like bowled, caught, stumped, hit wicket, leg before, run out, etc. Since singles and threes will be unavailable, the possibility of run-outs will significantly rise. Similarly, the proposed restriction of "one over per batter" will give rise to a more aggressive batting style, resulting in more stumping and caught/behind dismissals.   

6. Fielders and Bowlers will be allowed Protective Gear. In the traditional format, batters and wicket-keepers are amply protected with (protective) gear, but the fielders and bowlers aren't. It makes no professional and economic sense to allow a good percentage of the players to sit out a good part of the season with finger injuries. Therefore, this new format will enable the bowler and all fielders to use baseball-type gloves, on the one hand, to help prevent such unnecessary injuries. Of course, in the field, it will be their choice to use it or not. They will lose their match fees (or prorated contract fees) if they are forced to sit out with such preventable finger injuries. The liability clause of the disability insurance must also contain similar stipulations, making it difficult for them to be rehired for future events. While they need a helping hand from the rules committee, they must also be willing participants. Irrespective of their prominence and celebrity, this format will never allow or encourage anyone to practice or demonstrate any narcissism whatsoever so that the audience continues to grow exponentially, not drift away.

7. Names of Existing Field Positions will be renamed. Granted, the game of cricket is a common religion in cricket-playing countries, so the fans learn not to question its age-old shortcomings and idiosyncrasies; for example, the field position names like "Silly mid-on / Silly mid-off," "Point," "Third Man" "Forward short leg," etc. will be a hard-sell in non-cricketing countries. The new format will therefore comprise a new set of non-technical, sensible, and easy-to-remember field (position) names, e.g., Base, Short Base Left/Right, Long Base Left/Right, Deep Long Base Left/Right, Short Boundary Left/Right, Long Boundary Left/Right, Long Slip Left/Right, Deep Long Slip Left/Right, etc. Instead of confusing the new audience with unnecessary semantics – Long vs. Deep, etc. – the name Deep Long Base Left/Right will be self-differentiating, meaning this field position will be further deeper than the Long position along the same field corridor. To market a sport globally, it must be a marketable product, free of silly antiquities and age-old cultural nuances.

8. Tie-breaker will require One More Inning, not just one more over. In case of a tie, i.e., both teams tied at the same score, each team will bat one more inning with one over each. When a match is finally decided by one over, it becomes somewhat unreasonable and irrational, at least from the audience viewpoint. In this new format, the one additional tie-breaker inning will bring more sanity and reliability. For example, NBA Finals are played on 'best-of-seven' form, allowing the better team to prevail than ending the entire season with a one-off fluke. Likewise, the extra time in soccer is 30 minutes (1/3 of the regulation time), followed by a shoot-out. If the tie-breaker inning ends in a tie again, a one-over solution will be implemented until, of course, the tie is broken.

9. Batters will Not have the advantage to Play for the Record Book – In both short forms of Cricket – One Day International (ODI/50 overs) and T-20 (20 overs) – bowlers are restricted to 10 and 4 overs, respectively; batters, however, have no such restrictions. This encourages them to play for their record book at the expense of the true spirit of the sport. For example, as a batter approaches a personal century (100 runs) in ODI, he tends to take a much lesser risk by slowing down the run rate, often moving at a significantly slower rate. While the cricket fans are used to this practice, spectators and viewers in the baseball world will find it extremely annoying. The proposed one over per inning batting restriction would remove this selfish practice altogether.    

The combination of 4-innings per side, one set of wickets, and one batter at a time coupled with one-batter/bowler per over will make the match more unpredictable, hence entertaining, till the end – a big win-win for both live and media audiences.

This new format must show the baseball world that an alternative and vastly different cricket version could quickly be developed and marketed, which is highly entertaining, thrilling, media-friendly, and interactive fun sport. 2D TV is way too outdated for sports and entertainment. By making this version 3D TV-friendly, viewers will have more fun watching it and perhaps participating alongside. A "Virtual" version will soon be developed, allowing viewers to play along "live."

Initially, this format could be sold to the TV channels that broadcast traditional cricket and baseball in cricket and baseball worlds. As this format gets momentum, the bidding war for broadcast rights will intensify. The investment company owning its worldwide rights will hopefully go public, so the sports fans worldwide may own a piece of this futuristic sport-and-entertainment pie. Suppose the Indian Premier League (comprising only eight teams) can skyrocket to $6.3B in 11 short years. In that case, this new format of cricket could result in a superb value within a decade as well, considering the popularity of baseball in some of the wealthiest countries (US, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Netherlands, etc.) and that of cricket in the UK, Australia, Asia and Africa, and West Indies.

Sid Som MBA, MIM

homequant@gmail.com

COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL 

Reality Cricket for Investors

(Click on the image to enlarge)

Also Read:
Introducing Reality Cricket on the Golf Course

Introducing Reality Cricket on the Golf Course

    COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL

    US COPYRIGHT REGISTRATTION # TXu 2-163-784

The game of cricket is almost a religion in most cricketing nations, especially in South Asia. While Australia, England, Ireland, New Zealand, South Africa, West Indies and Zimbabwe are the other major cricketing nations, it enjoys some popularity in number of other countries like Bermuda, Canada, Kenya, Malaysia, Netherlands, Nigeria, Scotland, Singapore, Tanzania, UAE, etc.    

Though there are some similarities between Cricket and Baseball, the major playing nations are almost mutually exclusive. Baseball has always been popular in advanced nations like Canada, Japan, Netherlands, South Korea and the United States. Thus far, the marketing efforts to expand cricket into the major baseball nations have been marginally successful, at best. Even when an exhibition cricket match is played in the US, the audience is mostly the immigrants from the cricketing nations, making it commercially unviable to attract any major TV channel to carry it live.

For cricket to be a viable alternative to baseball in major baseball nations (and vice versa down the road), it has to be lot more entertaining to the viewers at large. While the cricket fans consider the shortened T-20 format very entertaining, it’s not so at all for their baseball counterparts. In fact, the baseball lovers will still find it quite “boring.”

The only way cricket can be sold to the major baseball world is by reinventing the format itself. From the entertainment point of view, the two-innings format is fundamentally backward-bending, offering little to virtually no incentives to the commercial media in the all-baseball world, because more often than not, this format makes an on-going match far too predictable, thus destroying the fun and thrill of it. For example, when the team batting first collapses or even performs sub-par, the outcome is more or less predictable. So, who would stick around for the second inning? Not the TV viewers, at least – which is the primary viewership.

While the traditional format cannot be changed overnight, a highly entertaining and thrilling “Reality” format could be invented and tried in the baseball world. If it becomes successful there, it would be equally, if not more, successful at home as well.

    

Reality cricket – by design – must be lot more entertaining and thrilling than the traditional variety. In addition to supporting the standard 2D smart TV, this form and format will also be 3D TV-friendly, thus attracting new generations of media audience who are otherwise unaware of or are indifferent to the world of cricket. Again, it’s not going to be the garden variety club cricket which will be commercially unappealing to the futuristic media.

Once the Reality version starts to gain commercial momentum, the makers of virtual sports will quickly jump in, taking it to the next level where viewers can virtually play along “live.” The Virtual 2.0 will be AI-friendly, allowing the virtual batters to try out different “timing” and “striking” options which the actual on-field batter could only wish. Similarly, the virtual bowlers will be able to try out a combination of various “line” and “length” options which, again, the actual on-field bowler could only wish.

So, what’s the new “Reality” cricket? Here it is…

1. Playing Field: Instead of the traditional flat cricket grounds, it will be shifted to the professional Golf Courses, preferably 18-hole Resort Golf Courses, with magnificent surroundings, for an added TV attraction. By switching the venue to a golf course, the so-called home field advantage will cease to exist. Since the makeup of each golf course is somewhat different, players will encounter new challenges each time they take the field. Also, the net practice and the practice matches will be arranged on smaller courses, keeping the thrill and unpredictability of playing on the big course alive. The same cricketing bat and ball will be used for now, with a usual cricketing pitch. Down the road the ball will be remanufactured with synthetic material to make it less susceptible to wetness. Pre-fab drop-in pitch will be ideal to maintain the portability from course to course locally, even regionally. Other than the pitch, the rest of the course remains unchanged which will help keep the costs under control. But, unlike in traditional cricket, only one batter will come in and bat at a time so only one set of wickets will be used. Should the course comprise actual water hazards like artificial ponds or lagoons, they must be netted using modern technology to get the ball out of the net promptly, without having to deal with the ball getting wet. Rain will stop play as is customary in the traditional format. Obviously, it is going to be played during the day only, differing from the short One Day International (ODI, usually day/night) or T-20 (mostly under floodlight) formats. Timeouts will be necessary to keep the ad dollars flowing.

2. Playing Format: In terms of the number of overs, the Reality format will initially share the T-20 (i.e., 20-overs) format. But, instead of the cricketing 2-innings format, the Reality format will be split up into 4 batting innings per side (5 overs per inning) to a total of 8 innings, thus allowing each team to bat for four rotating innings, meaning the team that opens the batting will return again to bat out the 3^rd, 5^th and 7^th innings, respectively. Needless to say, the same team will take the bowling/fielding for the alternate 2^nd, 4^th, 6^th and 8^th innings, respectively, when the opposition bats. The problem of the one-batting-inning per side is that the match often becomes far too predictable early into the second inning; for instance, if the side batting first does not put up enough runs on the board, the match becomes quite predictable within 5 to 7 overs into the second inning – to the utter dismay of the attending fans and the media audiences at large. As the new Reality data points come in and get adequately mined, the format could be later expanded to 25 or 30 overs, adding innings proportionally.   

3. Player Format: While all cricket formats call for 11 players per side, the Reality version will comprise 7 players per side, reducing the use of specialists; for example, out of the 11 cricket players, 5 are generally specialist batters, 5 are specialist bowlers (1 is often considered an all-rounder) and the remaining 1 is a dedicated wicket-keeper with good batting skills. Again, the problem to this type of side selection is that the match becomes more predictable. When the top-order of batting (primarily specialist batters) collapses, the specialist bowlers (a.k.a., the tail-enders) can hardly come to the rescue and turn things around. Likewise, when the batters get their day, the bowling side starts to feel an insurmountable pressure. Again, the selection of specialists generally makes things more predictable, which is fine when the sole objective is to win a tournament. In the proposed Reality format, where entertainment is the primary objective, the team selection will be based on all-round skills, eventually paving the way for a whole new generation of skilled all-rounders. Of course, each team will need a 5-player bench considering it will be played under the Sun. This all-rounder approach will change the overall grooming and bidding (on player auctions) process.

4. Batting and Bowling: Under the Reality format, each batter gets to bat only one over per inning, with the mandatory introduction of two new batters in consecutive innings. Of course, when the first five batters do not survive till the end of the fifth over, sixth and seventh batters will bat. To put in simple terms, only three batters from inning one can be repeated while batting in inning two and so forth. Similarly, bowlers can bowl only one over per inning, with the mandatory introduction of two new bowlers in consecutive innings. Therefore, the bowling side can reintroduce only three bowlers when they open their second bowling inning. Of course, the exception to this rule will come into effect when more than five batters needs to bat in an inning. This general one-over batting and bowling restrictions will force teams to recruit more all-rounders than specialists, lessening the usual predictability of the game. The combination of 4-innings per side and 1-batter/bowler per over will make the match more unpredictable, hence entertaining, till the end – a big win-win for both live and media audiences. A team can use a dedicated wicket-keeper across all four innings, for now (this practice may also be dispensed with down the road, making way for more unpredictability).

5. Scoring Runs: This is going to be very different from the traditional cricket format. Batters must return to the base to be credited for any runs, making the traditional singles (1’s), threes (3’s), boundaries and over-boundaries off-limit. In other words, the batters can only hit 2’s and 4’s (maximum per bowl) by returning to the base. In order to minimize inaccurate bowling and imprecise throws, byes and leg byes will be allowed. A 2-run deduction will be taken when a batter’s strike hits the hazard (water or bunker) without bounce, beating any reasonable endeavor by the nearest fielder to catch the ball (reasonableness of the fielder’s attempt will be determined by the umpire). This deduction will stand irrespective of the batter’s score in the inning and will be counted as a cumulative negative (i.e., deduction).

The advantage of having only one batter at a time is that the batting momentum will continue, keeping the entertainment ante significantly up, which is critical for the Reality cricket to garner worldwide audience. In a traditional format, since two batters bat together, the entertainment aspect of the game often gets compromised. Generally, when one batter goes on a scoring spree, the other slows down, playing a more supporting or defensive role (except in death overs), which could be technically fine, but generally at the expense of the entertainment value of the game. Having one batter at a time removes altogether the potential of the second batter slowing down.  

6. Batter Dismissal: Until this format gains some meaningful commercial momentum, any new and specialized technology will not be forthcoming. Therefore, the use of the existing DRS and related technology will force this format to continue with the current batter dismissal options like, bowled, caught, stamped, hit wicket, leg before, run out, etc. Since singles will be unavailable, the possibility of run outs will rise.  Similarly, the aggressive nature of batting will give rise to more stumping opportunities. Down the road, when the specialized technology is available for the Reality version, the direct no-bounce hits to hazards could be treated as dismissals, rather than the proposed negative scores (2-run deduction). When the playing golf course comprises trees, a catch bounced off a tree will be disallowed. A batter however will be allowed full credit for the runs scored even when the ball bounces off a tree. Since scoring will be allowed, run-outs will also be allowed when the ball bounces off a tree.    

7. Protective Gear: In the traditional format, batters and wicket-keepers are amply protected with (protective) gear, but the fielders and bowlers aren’t. It makes no professional and economic sense to allow a good percentage of the players to sit out a good part of the season with finger injuries. The Reality version will therefore allow the bowler and all fielders to use baseball-type gloves on one hand to help prevent such unnecessary injuries. Of course, on the field, it will be their choice to use it or not. By the same token, they will lose their match fees (or prorated contract fees) if they are forced to sit out with such preventable finger injuries. The liability clause of the disability insurance must also contain similar stipulations, thus making it difficult for them to be rehired for future events as well. While they need a helping hand from the rules committee, they must also be willing participants. Irrespective of their prominence and celebrity, this format will never allow or encourage anyone to practice or demonstrate any narcissism whatsoever, so that the audience continues to exponentially grow, not drift away.

8. Field Positions: Granted, the game of cricket is a common religion in cricket-playing countries. So, the fans learn to not question its age-old shortcomings and idiosyncrasies; for example, the field position names like “Silly mid-on / Silly mid-off” and “Forward short leg” will be a hard-sell in non-cricketing countries. The Reality format will therefore comprise a new set of non-technical, sensible and easy-to-remember field (position) names, e.g., Base, Short Base Left/Right, Long Base Left/Right, Deep Long Base Left/Right, etc. Instead of confusing the new audience with unnecessary semantics – Long vs. Deep, etc. – the name Deep Long Base Left/Right will be self-differentiating, meaning this field position will be further deeper than the long position, but along the same field corridor. Considering it’s a seven-per-side event, only five more fielders – other than the bowler and the wicket-keeper who will hold dedicated field positions – will be present on the course. The idea is that the marketing team must be armed with a marketable product, free of silly antiquities.

9. Tie-breaker: In case of a tie, i.e., both teams tied at the same score, each will play one more inning, instead of the traditional one over each. When a match is finally decided by one over, it becomes somewhat unreasonable and irrational, at least from the audience viewpoint. In the Reality format, the one additional tie-breaker inning will bring more sanity and reliability to the game. For example, NBA Finals are played on ‘best-of-seven’ format, allowing the better team to prevail than ending the entire season with a one-off fluke. If the tie-breaker inning ends in a tie again, a one over solution will be implemented until, of course, the tie is broken. There will be one more twist to the tie-breaker inning: The team winning the tie-breaker toss will get to choose the opponent’s five batters, while the toss-losing team will get to designate the opponent’s five bowlers. Similarly, if the tie-breaker inning runs into tie-breaker over(s), the toss winner will get to designate the opponent’s batter while the toss loser will choose the opponent’s bowler. This new approach will force all competing teams to hire quality all-rounders rather than the traditional specialists who are good at only one aspect of the game.

This Reality format, by no means, attempts to reform the traditional format; rather it primarily attempts to show the cricketing and non-cricketing world that an alternative and vastly different version could easily be developed and marketed strictly as another highly entertaining, thrilling, media-friendly and interactive fun sport. Secondarily, it will provide an easy and rapid expansion into the commercially unharnessed non-cricketing world. The 2D TV is way too outdated for sports and entertainment. By making this version 3D TV-friendly, viewers will have more fun watching it and perhaps participating alongside. A “Virtual” version will soon be developed, allowing viewers to play along “live.”

Initially, this format could be sold to the TV channels that broadcast the traditional cricket tournaments in the cricketing world and to the Golf channels in the non-cricketing world. As the Reality version gets momentum, the bidding war to broadcast it will intensify. The investment company owning its worldwide rights will hopefully go public so the sports fans around the world can own a piece of this futuristic sport-and-entertainment pie.

Just imagine the unrestricted domain of opportunity this Reality version offers to the future investors. Later, a parallel Reality version can be ported to the game of Baseball as well.

Finally, Some Stats to be Excited about…

        1. Major League Baseball (US/Canada) Revenue $10B
    2. Top 5 MLB Teams’ Combined Revenue $2.7B
    3. Nippon Professional Baseball Revenue $1.1B
    4. Indian Premier League (Cricket) valued at $6.3B
    5. The Economic Impact of Golf in the US: $84B (Forbes)

  Developed and presented by:
  Sid Som, MBA, MIM
  President, Homequant, Inc.
  homequant@gmail.com

  COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL
  US COPYRIGHT REGISTRATTION # TXu 2-163-784

Reality Cricket – An Investor Presentation