Womans cricket

New Zealand bowled out for 48.. i rest my case

I agree - they may as well show an under 11s match for all the interest anyone has in it

this explains why Radio 5 is claiming the World T20 comprises 62 matches - i initially thought they must mis-stakenly think the Super 10 is all play all ( 45 matches, plus 12 Group stage, 2 eliminators, 2 semis and a final perhaps ).
And then the penny dropped. They mean 35 actual 'matches' plus 27 supporting 'games' including a play-off for 9th place.

i've watched enough of this to recognise that there are no more than a dozen batswomen in the entire international set-up capable of timing the ball properly. i probably think around 10 and less than half of that if you take out eng, nz and aus.

so first of all, copying golf and shortening the boundaries is unacceptable. a well timed shot with one of today's bats will race to the boundary regardless of the strength of the batter.

eee by gum, back in my day, any half decent school or club under 13 side would have at least 3 out of the top 6 who could time the ball properly, and that's when people were batting with the geoff boycott slazengers which were as thick as piece of fence panel with a middle the size of a golf ball

(golf ball you say? you were lucky lad, used to dream of a bat with a middle that big, luxury, you had it easy, etc, etc)

some of the bowling, particularly the slower bowling is okay, but by and large the standard is appalling and i agree, there's no way it should be on tv.

Extent of coverage is nothing more than PC madness. As for ECB increase in funding subsidising England players to become full time professionals, well the mind boggles.

Already too much international cricket going on in the world. Now broadcasters want to add to it by showing womens cricket?

if it was up to me there would no coverage of women's cricket and no funding for it either

all resources should be ploughed into the men's game, at both senior and youth team level

An actual women's match result this week

Pakistan Women 81 (19.5/20 ov); Bangladesh Women 76/6 (20/20 ov)

It may be rubbish, but my local club side had 2 women playing for us and they did hold their own, sometimes contributing very well with the ball and bat. But these 2 women were internationals and we were 2nd division club cricket (new zealand) so that probably says enough. But it was fun having them in the team and they spooked oppositions as they did not know how to approach them. They were (with their international training) by and large the best technical fielders in the team too.

FredRescue 22 Mar 14 16:45   

An actual women's match result this week Scared

Pakistan Women 81 (19.5/20 ov); Bangladesh Women 76/6 (20/20 ov)

An actual result of the opening mens world cup this year

Afghanistan 72 all out; Bangladesh 78/1

don't think that really supports the argument

Proves how $hit the Taliban are at cricket

Pakistan womens 81 looking a good score after this afternoons match

all resources should be ploughed into the men's game, at both senior and youth team level

I disagree with that. All resources should be ploughed into the game based on merit alone. If as tyco161 says, there are a couple of women who might be durham league standard ( not sure how good his local side are ) then the resources should be based on the standard of the league not the chromosomes of who is in it.
Gender based allocation of funds should have no place in society, whether it's child care, prostitution or cricket.

I see an Aussie woman got 126 off 65 balls with 4 sixes - I can only assume that someone mistook the 30 metre fielding area as the boundary rope

guys,is it only caveman misogynists who can post on here or is it available 2 all?
we all got mothers,sisters,wives.would u not be 100% behind them if it were a family member?
& given testosterone levels i'd say it's a fair bet u'd wanna slap smn dissing them.
let 'la difference vive'.

i think you miss the point many are making johnny.

i'm delighted that woman want to, and do, play cricket.

there's already plenty of integration with quality women players competing in men's leagues.

the issue I and many others have is the amount of coverage it gets in relation to its quality.

it's not good enough yet to take up TV time. it probably will be in the next 4 or 5 years amongst 4 international sides, but right now, too much of it is too poor - particularly the batting.

DStyle there is hours and hours of absolute dross on tv any time of the day. You yourself have an option if you do not like what is put on. Use your remote control...don't even bother getting off your backside...and use the OFF button.

again, missing the point.

women's football is arguably a much higher standard but gets less coverage.

if you had a daughter and wanted her to take an interest in cricket would you show her a men's match or a women's match?

now, say tennis, i'd show her both men's and women's. but cricket, i wouldn't take her to a women's match because it's a poor representation of the game.

DStyle...sports producers would only put it on tv if there was a demand for it. I myself cannot stand watching Formula One so exercise my right not to do so by switching it off. I am not saying womens cricket is engrossing but then again how many hours of p1ss poor mens sport have we sat through. Im sad to say I used to sit through 90% of all football that was on tv...now I may watch 1 game in every 10. There is such a thing as overkill...and most mens sport these days is suffering from just this.

fouraces
24 Mar 14 09:32
Joined:
27 Oct 07
| Topic/replies: 1,190 | Blogger: fouraces's blog
FredRescue 22 Mar 14 16:45   

An actual women's match result this week Scared

Pakistan Women 81 (19.5/20 ov); Bangladesh Women 76/6 (20/20 ov)

An actual result of the opening mens world cup this year

Afghanistan 72 all out; Bangladesh 78/1

don't think that really supports the argument


Bangladesh were chasing 82 and got to 76 with 4 wickets still in hand is the point.

Not sure what your point regarding Bangladesh chasing 73 down for the loss of one wicket is? 1 wicket would probably have been round about the xpectation at start of their innings?

fouraces 28 Mar 14 14:14 
DStyle...sports producers would only put it on tv if there was a demand for it. I myself cannot stand watching Formula One so exercise my right not to do so by switching it off. I am not saying womens cricket is engrossing but then again how many hours of p1ss poor mens sport have we sat through. Im sad to say I used to sit through 90% of all football that was on tv...now I may watch 1 game in every 10. There is such a thing as overkill...and most mens sport these days is suffering from just this.


i disagree with that.  there's no demand for it, no-one goes to watch it. i suspect there was probably some clause in sky's contract with the ecb about raising its profile.

Dstyle is correct. The only way they can get the paying public to watch is to stick it on as a prequel to a proper match.The BBC are the worst . To listen to them you would think the English public were gripped by the exploits of Charlotte and Clare where in reality only the tiniest minority give a monkeys.Another case of political correctness gone loopy lou.

Even the Beeb wouldnt give a toss if they still had the TV rights to proper sports

dstyle
there's no demand for it, no-one goes to watch it

bang on the money

it is PC gone mad