Baseball vs Cricket, Which sport is better?

Cricket fans will always argue that it’s harder to hit cricket ball – but this is not true. A show by ESPN’s Sport Science completely disproved this myth. The contact surface area of a baseball bat is significantly smaller than a cricket bat, which means putting the ball in play requires more accuracy with a baseball bat. This was demonstrated where a pro cricketer tried to hit with a baseball bat – with relatively poor results. And a pro baseball player tries to hit with a cricket bat with significantly better success. The reaction time has to quicker in baseball too. The distance between the wickets in Cricket is 20m. The distance between the pitching rubber and home plate: 18m. Therefore, you have less time to think and react in Baseball. This is not a myth; this is a scientifically proven fact – it is physically harder to hit a baseball with a baseball bat. Cricket fans will argue that cricket bowlers launch the ball faster than baseball pitchers – again this is not true.

The average speed of a cricket bowl at the top level is 88 mph. The average speed of a baseball pitch – 92 mph. The fastest ever cricket bowl – Shoaib Aktar, 100.2mph. The fastest ever baseball pitch – Aroldis Chapman, 105.1 mph. Baseball wins. Cricket fans argue that cricket is played by more people worldwide. This is an annoying statistic, as Cricket is played by fewer countries where the populations are massive. Cricket fans use this to overexaggerate popularity, and therefore superiority. Baseball is played in more countries – where the populations are significantly less. Baseball fans use this statistic to overexaggerate popularity and therefore superiority. And even then, using populations or number of countries is not an accurate measure of how many people actually play the sport in these countries. To me – this does not dictate how popular a sport actually is. Cricket fans deem baseball inferior because baseball players use a glove to catch the ball.

Making fun of a sport because they use equipment for safety reasons, is incredibly shallow. Baseball players use gloves as a safety measure, not because they’re incapable of catching the ball without a glove. And any Cricket fans who disagree with that … what’s this then? What’s that? What’s that thing that the Wicket Keeper has on his hands. Oh yeah, it’s gloves – this argument is largely hypocritical. I’m all for player safety and I condemn those who make fun of things that make a sport safe to play, especially if it’s safety for kids. You’re literally are a disgusting scumbag if you make fun of safety measures. Arguments for Cricket Baseball fans will argue that the Cricket ball is easier to hit, and therefore it’s easier to score runs. But that’s not necessarily true. Yes, we’ve scientifically proven that it is harder to physically hit a baseball, but it’s certainly not easier to score runs because of it.

In baseball, generally there’s 3 ways you can be out. Stuck out, caught out, run out. In Cricket, there’s 10. And not only do you have to defend your wickets, you also have to defend yourself. Because in baseball if you’re hit by a pitch, you get to cry about it a little, and then get a free pass to first base. In Cricket, if you’re hit by a ball and subsequently hurt from it, it’s perfectly legal. And if it strikes your leg in front of wicket, you’re out! Throwing at the batsman is not only legal, but encouraged. A bowler could bounce the ball at your head with every ball and it’d be perfectly acceptable. Can you score runs efficiently if they’re gunning for your face? Hmmm, debatable. Baseball fans will argue that it’s easier to put the ball in play in Cricket – but that’s not true either. It’s not enough just to make contact with the ball, it’s putting the ball in play without being out. In baseball, you hit the ball between the foul lines, which forms this 90-degree area.

You hit the ball outside the foul lines, you’re not out unless you’re caught in foul territory. But a cricket batsman has to be able to hit 360 degrees around. Yes, they have to be adept at hitting the ball behind them as well as in front and their sides. And even then, they could still be caught or run out – as opposed to being let off with a foul ball in baseball. Yes, there are bigger gaps in the field because the fielding team has to cover more ground, but there’s a lot more to think about than just hitting a ball with all you might. In Cricket, you have to be more selective with what you hit. Because once you’re out, you don’t get another chance to bat again. You are done. Baseball fans will argue that cricket bowlers have no skill whatsoever – but it could be argued that they have to have more. In baseball, a pitcher stands in one place, throws the ball in the air directly to the batter who is standing in one place.

But a bowler in Cricket can deliver the ball anywhere along the crease, on either side of the wicket. They can throw the ball on the full (like in baseball where it doesn’t hit the ground), or they can bounce the ball from the floor. They can fast bowl it, spin it, hook it, roll it, either at the wicket, at the gaps around the wicket or at the player themselves. Whilst we’ve proven that they don’t throw as fast, they use infinitely more tricks to try and get the batsman out. This (unlike what the myth suggests) requires skill. Baseball fans will argue that Cricket is long and boring. Not exactly covering themselves with glory on this one, but the reason baseball fans say that is because of Test Matches. Due to their format, they can take anywhere up to 5 days to play. Whilst that’s just down to the very nature of the sport and its rules, the same can’t be said about newer format T20 – where some of the games are shorter than Major League Baseball games. It all depends what format you’re watching. And as for the boring part – that’s a subjective opinion rather than an objective fact.

It’s kind of like comparing an Apple to a Lemon. Lemon fanboys will argue that lemons are better because they’re more yellow, and Apple fanboys will argue that Apples are better because they begin with the letter A. You could invent any metric to support or disprove any argument between these two, but it’s not a fair comparison and contrary to both sets of fans that say things like Cricket is an inferior copy of Baseball or Baseball is an American derivative of Cricket, neither is true. Because they always were and always have been two completely separate sports. That were invented around about the same time, with no common heritage or overlap – other than the fact that both sports originated in England. There is no sport that is objectively better, as the objectives are completely different for either one. Yes, both sports are played with a bat and ball, but that’s where the similarities end.