Abdul Tauqeer Brings Science to the (Cricket) Field

Science on the Field: Understanding Water Through Cricket I did not expect cricket practice to become a place where I would talk about flood mapping. But somewhere between players setting up cones and adjusting field positions, I began to see how naturally the conversation could shift from sport to science.

As a Ph.D. student in Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, my research focuses on flood mapping and water resources management. Much of my work involves satellite imagery and environmental modeling. It is technical, data driven, and often far removed from everyday conversation. When I joined the STEM Ambassador Program, I started asking myself a simple question: how often do the people outside of academia get to see how this science connects to their lives?

I chose the Las Vegas Vikings Cricket Team as my focal group. They are a mix of students and working professionals who meet regularly for practices and matches. What drew me to this group was not just my shared interest in cricket, but the fact that environmental conditions directly affect their experience. In Las Vegas, extreme heat can shorten practices. After rainfall, sections of the field sometimes hold water longer than expected. These are small things, but they matter when you are trying to play safely and competitively.

Before designing the engagement activity, I spent time simply being present. I attended practices, observed how players communicated, and asked informal questions about how weather affects gameplay. I learned quickly that this group values practical discussion over formal presentations. They prefer conversation. They like examples they can relate to. That insight shaped everything that followed.

I designed an activity called Science on the Field: Understanding Water Through Cricket. Instead of giving a technical explanation of flood modeling, I prepared a few simple satellite maps showing water patterns in Nevada and Pakistan. My goal was not to lecture. It was to connect water movement across landscapes with something the team already understood well, how they read and adapt to field conditions. The engagement took place during a regular practice session at Silver Bowl Park. We started with a short discussion about teamwork in science and teamwork in sport. From there, we looked at the maps together. Rather than presenting conclusions, I asked questions. Where does water tend to collect on this field after rain? Why might that happen? How does slope change playability?

One of the most effective moments came when players began pointing out specific areas of the field that remain damp longer than others. That led to a discussion about drainage, surface material, and how small elevation differences influence water flow. The science was there, but it unfolded through their observations, not mine.

The session lasted about two hours, longer than I originally planned. Players were engaged and asked thoughtful questions. Some mentioned that the cricket examples made the ideas easier to follow than a typical science explanation. Others commented that they had not previously thought about how water patterns affect their field beyond whether it was playable.

In evaluating the session, I relied mainly on informal feedback and observation. The conversational format seemed to lower barriers. People spoke freely. There was no sense that anyone was being tested or lectured. That felt important.

Looking back, what went well was the use of familiar context. Cricket served as a bridge between abstract environmental modeling and lived experience. The interactive format encouraged shared learning rather than one directional instruction. At the same time, there are things I would change. The session may have been slightly too long, especially since it followed physical drills. Next time, I would shorten the discussion and prepare a brief digital summary to share afterward through the team’s WhatsApp group. That might reinforce the key ideas without requiring additional time on the field.

This experience has changed how I think about public engagement. I am more aware now that effective science communication does not require simplifying science to the point of losing meaning. It requires finding the right entry point. In this case, the entry point was a cricket field.

In the final STEMAP report, I plan to acknowledge the team’s contributions and share a personalized flood map of their playing field. It feels like a small gesture, but it may help connect the conversation back to a place they use every week.

I am grateful to the Las Vegas Vikings Cricket Team for welcoming me into their practice and engaging openly in this discussion. I also appreciate the guidance of the STEM Ambassador Program, which encouraged me to step outside the lab and into the community.