Advertisers will only splash their money on a large audience with significant disposable income. If either of these two elements are missing, then the financial aspect of the sport disappears, irrespective of its popularity.
My answer in #20 stands. Maybe someone else will do the necessary research. 
Reminds me of a joke I heard during the last baseball strike.
I am not sure about that
- one thing I’ve said many times (and I have caveats about) is that nobody ever lost money by going down market.
Another is that personal aspirations are seldom in synch with corporate aspirations
- for example I as CEO of MegaTobacco might sponsor the MegaCar racing team solely because I want to ‘talk technical’ at the golf club.
I’ve heard of an Indian phenomenon where they sell shampoo in sachets as well as bottles, the idea is to get market acceptance.
Actually, when it comes to cricket, a billion Chinese don’t give a shit.
I would just like to take this chance to officially be the first person on the planet to make a serious suggestion about how the 50 over game is played. I’ve chosent to use the Straight Dope Messageboard due to it’s inarguable world wide influence.
I submit that the “One Day Game” should be broken into two 25 over sessions per side, two innings per side, giving a total of 50 overs. That way, both sides get to field and bat during the day, and they also get to field and bat during the night. The 1st innings for each side should be considered “fully over” after 5 wickets have fallen, or 25 overs have been bowled, whichever comes first. Any team which is out after losing 5 wickets in their 1st innings will not be given extra overs in their 2nd innings. They will only get another 25 overs and this will force sides to regret their recklessness if they lose 5 wickets in their 1st innings.
Batsmen who are “not out” at the end of the 1st innings should be allowed to walk back to the crease at the start of the 2nd innings. Any side which is “all out” (5 wickets) after their first innings AND which is more than 100 runs behind their opponents 1st innings should be forced to follow on, again, with a maximum of 5 wickets or 25 overs, whichever comes first.
It would be a wonderful thing for the spectators, and it would far more accurately reflect Test Cricket where each side is allowed two innings (and a maximum number of wickets) per innings.
Clearly, I am right, and I have spoken. No correspondence will be entered into. This new One Day Game shall be known as the Boo Boo Foo system, and it will far more equitaby allow for periods of rain.
I thought something like that some years ago.
As you have publicly announced it, you have priority.
I almost feel like me as Darwin to you as Wallace
Except, of course, those Chinese playing the sport. (Think “Hong Kong” for a moment).
Alternatively, Boo Boo, if we’re to make the sport more accessible to the American public, how about this:
At the end of any over where no run has been scored, the striker is out, replaced by the next man in. And after any number of runs, the batsman at the striker’s end is out, replaced by the next man in. Get rid of the stumps and all related forms of dismissal - just missing the ball will see you out by the end of the over. Then the batsman doesn’t really need pads any more since he doesn’t have to stand near the target that the ball is being aimed at. Get rid of the peculiar no-ball rule which Americans don’t understand, but to compensate for being allowed to throw, don’t let the bowlers have a run-up. Don’t allow runs to be scored square of or behind the wicket - draw lines through mid-wicket and extra cover to indicate the permitted areas - and to keep the game balanced, reduce the number of fielders to nine. Let all the fielders wear one glove, not just the wicket-keeper - you’ll get more spectacular outfield catches that way.
You can probably fit in more than two innings to a side, as well.
Now that sounds like a REAL sport! 
Is US cricket anything like US Soccer in the rejection of saturation advertising and refusal to rewrite the game rules to allow for easy broadcasting with regular pauses for a word from our sponsors? If it can’t be televised, in America, it’s not going to catch on.
There’s also the fact that you can watch it for 45 minutes and still have no idea what’s going on…
Cricket can and does easily accomodate advertising - there’s a short pause after every over, which is normally long enough, and if the advert(s) run into the first ball of next over it’s no problem to use delayed broadcasting to catch up.
That’s almost a perfect description of the game of rounders.
Assuming cricket is the most popular sport in India (which it is) the worldwide popularity of cricket is impressive in people terms, but it’s limited to a small number of nations almost all of which have ties to the British crown. It’s “the second most popular sport in the world,” if that’s true, simply because the Indian subcontinent has a really high population. So why ask why cricket isn’t the second most popular sport in the USA? Cricket isn’t the first or second most popular sport in MOST countries. It’s barely noticed in Mexico, Germany, Canada, Japan, Russia, Ukraine, Brazil, Italy, China (aside from Hong Kong), Vietnam, Korea or any one of a hundred others. Is there something wrong with Germans, Russians and Brazilians because they’re not big cricket fans?
Why isn’t cricket popular in Germany?
Why isn’t cricket popular in Russia?
Why isn’t cricket popular in Libya?
Why isn’t cricket popular in Turkey?
Answer those questions.
Your frame of reference does not accord with reality.
It is not relevant to the discussion.
Therefore, it does not exist.
Hey, American cricket is fabulously popular! There’s a website to prove it!!
And we beat the Caymans. Wa-haa!!!
When are the Brits and SubContinentals going to take up basketball? It’s a World Sport!
I spend innumerable hours worrying about this stuff.
More proof of the soaring popularity of U.S. cricket (from the same site):
“Cricket is the sport of choice for students in many of the Colleges and Universities in the United States of America. Many of these Universities have well established cricket clubs and they participate in organized cricket leagues throughout the United States.”
They say it, it must be true. A cricket revolution is sweeping America! Pretty soon we’ll all be wearing white duds, playing Test matches and knocking those hard little balls through the wickets with our bats (those not actually playing will sit on the grass and eat crustless cucumber sandwiches with tea).
It’ll be fabulous.
They do that a lot y’know.
They also spell Netball “Basketball”
Speaking of Cricket in the US, here is an interesting review. Also, here is a page that discusses the professional league of 2004.
I know it looks like English writing and it sounds like English when I say each word out loud, but there was nothing comprehensible in the way those words are connected together that makes any sense whatsoever. 