You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side thats been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out.

When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who stay all out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game!

The pleasure derived from it comes from the fact that it takes time to understand all its intricacies, subtleties and terms – but if you take that time it becomes an absolute joy.

The best analogy I can think of is that cricket is to sport what Mozart is to music. Simple, catchy jingles might be more popular, but they do not compare to the majesty of a Mozart piece.

I think it's interesting how many sports build off similar rule sets. Cricket and baseball work similarly as do soccer and hockey.

I'm interested all sorts of games and their rules, I'm just not particularly interested in the actual teams and players. Baseball is handy as an analogy for cricket, because the broad concepts are similar, though the details are quite different. (Either game could be described, broadly, as: "One player throws the ball, another hits it; then, the pitcher's team tries to catch the ball, and the batter's team runs.") So it's just a matter of English-to-English translation, to describe the rules of one game in the terms of the other.