WORLD CUP: England v Australia – Ash to Ashes; Dust to Dust

Ash Gardner scored a swashbuckling hundred as England were ground to dust in the their penultimate match of the group stages of the World Cup.

The rules of Indoor Cricket dictate that a batter has to retire out when they reach 25 runs; but unfortunately for England the rules of Indore Cricket contain no such stipulation, with Gardner and Annabel Sutherland putting on the Ritz as they raced to be the first to reach a hundred before the runs required ran out. In the end, despite Gardner blocking out the last 3 deliveries of the 40th over to give Sutherland the chance to reach 3 figures, the latter decided to be content with 98* – telling Gardner to get it done after they’d run a single which left her off strike 3 balls into the 41st.

That Sutherland had that opportunity was entirely within England’s gift. When Nat Sciver-Brunt taunted New Zealand the summer before last, by blocking ball after ball to allow Maia Bouchier to get a century at Worcester, I said at the time that if I’d been Sophie Devine I’d have told Jess Kerr to bowl 4 wides; and I’d have done the same if I’d been NSB here. I suspect it’s what Meg Lanning would have done too; but that’s not NSB’s style, and Sutherland was given the chance, making two attempts to convert it with big slogs, before accepting that it wasn’t to be this time – there will be other centuries, of that I’m certain.

England 244-9 v Australia 248-4 #CWC25 🏏

CRICKETher (@crickether.com) 2025-10-22T15:59:05.142Z

Gardner won the race despite being 10 runs behind Sutherland on just 81 going into the 39th over; but three 4s off a somewhat perplexed-looking Sophie Ecclestone took Gardner into the 90s, and she didn’t look back from there. Having gone at just-shy of 8-an-over in the Middle phase, Australia turned the volume up again, hitting 86 runs in the Late Middle phase as they romped to a win that was at one stage looking very unlikely.

England 244-9 v Australia 248-4 #CWC25 🏏

CRICKETher (@crickether.com) 2025-10-22T16:00:05.470Z

Four cheap wickets early on had England on 92% win probability at the 20-over mark. They were “proper” wickets too. Lauren Bell, who has always had a bit of a rep for struggling to bowl to left-handers, found a pearl to bowl Phoebe Litchfield; while Linsey Smith bowled Georgia Voll, who slightly naively tried to slog-sweep the master of the top-spinner; and then caught-and-bowled Ellyse Perry. (The latter looked like just batter error, but the regularity with which Smith seems to get these wickets caught and bowled suggests that something deeper is going on.) Finally, a brilliant catch at cover by Sciver-Brunt saw off Beth Mooney, and Australia were up the creek.

But it turns out that they had not just one paddle, but two; and as a result England lost for the first time in this tournament.

However, although Gardner and Sutherland flogged them, England’s problem once again wasn’t really the bowling but the batting. They weren’t awful collectively, but despite a strong finish, with Charlie Dean and Alice Capsey helping them put on 76 runs in the last 10 overs, they couldn’t quite recover from a middle over lull that saw them add just 26 runs between overs 21 and 30. Wasting 10 overs like that just isn’t going to win you many games of cricket at the highest level, and it left England 30-50 short of par. They’d probably still have lost, but maybe not quite so bleakly.

Charlotte Edwards continues to show faith in her chosen XI, which has only changed once in this tournament when Lauren Bell and Sophie Ecclestone were unwell. In terms of the batting, this has meant that Emma Lamb has kept her spot despite a run of low scores and a highest of just 13. Consequently there was only one question on the lips of England fans: Where’s Waggy*?

Where's Waggy? The new puzzle book all England cricket fans are trying to solve!Available now, in all good bookshops! #CWC25 🏏

CRICKETher (@crickether.com) 2025-10-22T14:09:42.284Z

(*Danni Wyatt-Hodge – legend has it that it was Edwards herself who gave a teenage Danni Wyatt the nickname “WAG” due to her love of high fashion.)

Lamb looks so low on confidence that I think it would be kinder to put her out of her misery, and bring Wyatt-Hodge back for the final group match against New Zealand. That match is completely irrelevant to England – they are now guaranteed to finish either 2nd or 3rd whatever happens, and so will play the loser of Australia v South Africa in the semifinals.

Australia look unbeatable right now, but I still think India are the one side that could upset them; so I finish once again by repeating my prediction that we are going to see a rerun of 2017: England will progress to the final by beating South Africa, while India finally click and beat Australia. But the pressure of a home final will tell, and England will win the World Cup. You read it here first.

3 thoughts on “WORLD CUP: England v Australia – Ash to Ashes; Dust to Dust

  1. Have to admire your optimism Syd!

    Wish I could agree, but that is not possible, while Dunkley & Lamb both retain their places.DW-H could do no worse than them and was surely considered good enough to earn a place in the squad.I really hope that Lottie will give her chance v NZ.

    Like

  2. After much criticism of the England team in the recent past (not all of it entirely justified) I’m not sure you get to just blurt out “England will win the World Cup”. Maybe explain how you think that could that happen?

    Also “That (New Zealand) match is completely irrelevant to England – they are now guaranteed to finish either 2nd or 3rd whatever happens, and so will play the winner of Australia v South Africa in the semifinals.” Don’t you mean the loser?

    I think England could well lose to (what will probably be) SA in the semis – if it’s Australia, they almost certainly will. I also think that India will win the final if (and it is a reasonably big if) they get into it. That Home advantage is massive, as England saw in 2017.

    Like

Have Your Say...

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.