for example, the ball has more ways of reaching - bouncing, full toss, swinging, moving off the pitch, spinning - the batsman, while the batsman has more options and ways of hitting it...behind the wicket. additionally, the element of time, the pitch etc. add greater complexity to the game. in all these regards, cricket and cricketers have more elements, dimensions or parameters to deal with. of course, it can be argued that such variety might aid a greater mastery of breadth of activities but less specialization ie hitting a ball in a zone better and better....
Nah nah, baseball has variety too you know.
- 2 seam fastball, 4 seam fastball, sinker, splitter, cutter, slider, curveball, change up
- horizontal movement on the pitch, vertical movement on the pitch, how late that movement comes
- location - high/low, inside/outside
- velocity
- release point
Then there is the patience, pitch recognition, swing mechanics, timing etc etc
I could go on and on.
This is a sport where failing 2 times out of 3 is considered to be very good. I'd say it's quite complex.
Yeah, the ball doesn't bounce, but you have to be more selective in baseball too. You can't just block a pitch back to the pitcher and wait for the next one
I love both Cricket and Baseball, neither is better than the other, imo.
A lot of people talking out their arses about a sport they obviously know nothing about, tbh.
