I know it's easy to get sidetracked in these discussions. Someone may make a point then someone else says "but what about this other thing that's completely unrelated?"
Chess, and most other board games simply do not have the appeal, the viewership, the ratings, the money, the sponsors, the popularity, or the interest that sports do. The "chess is a sport" folks have become very silent when pressed on the issue about whether or not people who do NOT play will sit and watch an entire chess event. Because they know that just doesn't happen. It probably wouldn't happen with any other board game either.
But it happens very often with sports because, well, because they are sports. No doubt there have been big money chess events and a handful of spectators watching. But even the most enthusiastic chess fan will admit chess simply does not have the magnetism that sports do.
Curling
Another good example. I have watched curling. Chances are you have too. But I have never participated in curling even once in my life. Who knows curling might be one of those sports that has more watchers who dont play than watchers who do play.
By the way, a friend of mine said a new world record was set a few days ago. A man from WA set it at, and I might have this part wrong, 600 yards. 35 consecutive bullseyes. And the 36th was really close. But apparently it doesn't count because it was not a tournament. But there were a lot of witnesses that all now say he's the best in the world.
The "a sport is only a sport if people watch it" argument sounds sketchy. Not many in the USA watch Rugby or Cricket, but they are still sports. What's the critical amount of fans required to get the title?
Basing what is considered a sport on needing a majority share of the population approving of it seems like a slippery slope.
I see you are using quotation marks. Which means you are quoting someone. Who said those exact words? Who are you quoting?
As I recall nobody said that, but now you are saying someone said it. I believe what was said is that viewership by people who have NEVER participated in that activity is one of the many things that separate chess from sports.
You listed two great examples. Rugby and cricket. There is probably a HUGE percentage of viewers who watch those sports that have never played it. Even once. What percentage of chess event viewers do you believe have NEVER played chess?
In my limited experience with both live and televised chess tournaments I have never seen even one single person watch who has not played the game. Not a single one. Have you?
In contrast, I have witnessed MANY sports viewers who have never played the sport. I'm just one example. I watch the Superbowl almost every year because we usually throw a big party. But never in my life have I ever played football.