“The rich get richer; the poor get the picture” sang Pete Garrett on Midnight Oil’s 1982 hit Read About It.

One of the saddest realisations of the past decade has been the way that technology, far from being the democratising force we had all once hoped, has mainly been used to enhance and entrench the riches of the richest. Jeff Bezos buys another private island, while his minimum-waged delivery drivers struggle to pay their rent; Bill Gates pockets another billion, while his software subjects office workers to unprecedented levels of semi-covert surveillance.

The benefits of economic growth over the past 10 years have been disproportionately channelled to those who need it least, as the iron laws of the market have asserted themselves with a ferocity not seen since the early stages of the industrial revolution.

For a long time sport resisted these laws. The greatest footballer of my lifetime – Diego Maradona, who died a couple of weeks ago – grew up in a a third-world slum. In our own sport, England’s greatest allrounder, Enid Bakewell, was born in a mining village in Nottinghamshire. If you could hold a bat, or kick a ball, it didn’t matter where you were from.

Of course, this was only ever true in microcosm, especially in cricket. On an individual level, you were always more likely to succeed if you came from a wealthy family or went to a good school.

Zoom out further, to a national level, and the picture becomes starker still – money talks… loudly and incessantly. No one doubts the talent of players like Ellyse Perry and Meg Lanning; but the unprecedented levels of “investment” (which, after all, is just a polite way of saying “money”) that have been poured in by Cricket Australia have undoubtedly been a factor in their success.

Thus far, however, that investment has mostly been systemic – it’s investment in the clubs; the training facilities; and the coaches – and the human factor has remained the key wildcard. You can have all the “investment” in the world, but 18 year old Hayley Matthews can still walk into a World Cup final and rough you up, with talent that no money can buy… right?

Yes… but also… no.

A recent piece by Brittany Carter – How women’s cricket is being influenced by Major League Baseball – describes the use of a something called a “Blast Motion Sensor”. This is a high-tech gizmo which attaches to the bottom of the bat during training, and syncs up with an app to analyse the player’s bat swing, providing them with feedback which allows them to pinpoint areas of improvement to increase the power of their swing.

Human coaches have always done something like this, but this technology automates and enhances the degree of analysis and feedback possible from a human coach, allowing the player to fine-tune their game beyond the Nth degree.

This tech is being used today in domestic cricket in Australia, to augment the skills of the next generation; and it is undoubtedly amazing.

What it isn’t, however, is cheap; and that’s the grit, because like all tech, this stuff costs money – real money, that the 1% have and the 99% don’t; money that will buy an edge for the next generation… but only for those who can afford it. No girl in Moga, India (where Harmanpreet is from) or Barbados, West Indies (where Hayley Matthews grew up) will have access to these wonders.

And so in cricket, as in life, the 1% will pull away, using technology to fortify and magnify all the advantages they already have, leaving the rest – the 99%, also known as “us” – standing at the side of the road, peering in awe at their increasingly distant tail-lights.

The ECB have announced that next year’s inaugural Women’s Hundred will be played at the same 8 venues as the men’s competition – side-lining places like Taunton and Hove, in favour of Sofia Gardens in Cardiff, and The Ageas Bowl in Southampton.

Although the ECB haven’t quite said so, it now also looks likely that many more of the matches will be “Double Headers” with the men’s teams.

Head of The Hundred Women’s Competition Beth Barrett-Wild said:

“It’s clear that the wide ranging impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the delivery of elite sporting events and society more generally, necessitates a change to our plans from 2020.”

“The move to an integrated eight-venue model with the Men’s Competition next summer will simultaneously enable us to reduce our operational risk, protect the delivery of the Women’s Competition, and optimise the opportunity to work with our broadcast partners to provide maximum visibility and exposure for the women’s game.”

Although this will be disappointing news for fans in some parts of the country, one up-side is that it does mean we will almost certainly get live-streams (or Sky TV coverage) of every game, with the necessary infrastructure already in place at all the big grounds.

The situation will be reviewed following next year’s competition, with the ECB leaving the door open to a return to the original venues in 2022.

Three bowlers are tied for leading wicket-taker in the league stages of WBBL 20/21 – Sarah Coyte, Nat Sciver and Sammy-Jo Johnson all took 18 wickets – but none of the 3 occupy top spot in our Bowling Rankings. That goes to Amelia Kerr, who took 16 wickets but pulls ahead of the pack thanks to having by far the best Economy Rate in the competition for bowlers bowling 15 or more overs.

Kerr’s ability to genuinely turn the ball both ways remains a potent weapon it seems, despite the scepticism early on in her career from certain parts of the commentary box that her googly is too obviously telegraphed. Even if you can “read” her out of the hand (and there are actually top international players who privately admit they can’t) it is still another thing to worry about, forcing a more defensive mindset on the batter; and at the end of the day, numbers like these don’t lie.

Sarah Glenn’s first season as an overseas star on the T20 rollercoaster has to be deemed a success. Though things probably didn’t go quite as well with the bat as she might have hoped, she excelled with the ball, taking 16 wickets at an Economy Rate of a shade over 6, putting her at No. 3 in the rankings.

From an Aussie point of view, I wonder if Hannah Darlington at No. 8 could actually be the answer to their long, and thus far somewhat ineffectual search for a young seamer who can stay fit for more than 10 minutes. (Don’t bother looking for Tayla Vlaeminck on this list – she’s injured again!) Darlington might not be “quick” quick, but neither is Megan Schutt; and like Schutt, Darlington seems to put the ball in the right place consistently enough to trouble the batters. Having had a breakthrough season last year, this was her Difficult Second Album™ and she’s risen to the challenge with another 15 tidy wickets.

Just behind Darlington, Grace Harris has had a good all-round season – coming in at No. 20 with the bat and No. 9 with the ball, despite only bowling 21 overs (Sarah Glenn by comparison bowled 48.2 overs).

Finally… can we talk briefly about Hayley Matthews? She’s 15th in the Bowling Rankings, but way down at 42nd in the Batting Rankings… again! When are we going to realise that she is actually a bowler (and gun fielder) who can bat a bit, and realign our expectations accordingly? I guess it is all about those first impressions from the 2016 T20 World Cup, but I’m not really sure it is helping her now?

As ever, we welcome your comments below!

Bowling Ranking = Wickets / Economy

The top spots in the 20/21 WBBL Batting Rankings are very much a case of The Usual Suspects – so much so that when I challenged The Editor™ to name the top 5, she got it right off the middle of the bat, without hesitation, deviation or repetition; though it is perhaps worth highlighting that Alyssa Healy takes first place, despite having scored fewer runs than any of the rest of the top 5, due to her outstanding Strike Rate of 161.

Beth Mooney is in pole position to finish as the leading run-scorer, though at the time of writing there are still the semis and final to play, and she could be caught by Meg Lanning, Sophie Devine or even potentially Heather Knight, who has continued her outstanding run of form in Australia, dating back to… well… she has always done well in Australia, but 2020 will certainly be one she’ll particularly remember, having also averaged 64 in the T20 World Cup back in 2020 BC [Before Corona].

Further down the list there are a couple of interesting placings, including Georgia Redmayne who is a new entry in the top 10 at No. 9. After moving from the Hurricanes to the Scorchers last season, she hit the road again to join the Heat, and she’s been a huge part of why they haven’t flopped this year, despite losing the likes of Mooney and Sammy-Jo Johnson, hitting 332 runs at 118 – a big step up from last year, when she scored 137 runs at 95. Also at the Heat, Laura Kimmince (The Artist Formerly Known As Laura Harris) has had a remarkable season – you quite often see a tail-ender with a Strike Rate of over 200, having made 20 or 30 runs in the season, but to score 140 runs at 203 is absolutely outstanding, coming in at 5 or 6 and taking the “closing” role to a new level.

Among the younger prospects, Courtney Webb has had another good season for the Renegades. Still only 20, she pushed on from last year, which is what you really want to see from an up-and-coming player – improving her Strike Rate from 97 to 112 as she contributed 246 runs, including a match-winning half-century off 33 balls against the table-topping Stars.

Batting Ranking = Runs * Strike Rate