In any team sport (and even in some nominally individual sports, like athletics) the concept of the team as a bonded unit is very important. You play for the team; you work for the team; you win for the team. Ask any player and they will tell you: it is the team – and being part of the team – that really matters!

And yet in the modern era of multiple teams, this presents a dilemma – on Super League Finals Day, Charlotte Edwards was team-mates with Carla Rudd… two weeks later they were facing off against each other in the County Championship, respectively for Kent and Berkshire. In the next few months, she will likely find herself playing against other Vipers team-mates in Australia’s WNCL and WBBL… but then next summer they will be Vipers together once more!

So what do you do with those little pieces of knowledge – the flaw in technique you know the player has been working on in the nets… the slower delivery you’ve overheard the coach discussing? Do you exploit that knowledge against someone who might be your team-mate again in six months time… or do you keep the secret?

It is a dilemma which India’s Smriti Mandhana alluded to in a recent interview with Cricbuzz, discussing the possibility of playing against national team-mate Harmanpreet Kaur in the WBBL, making it pretty clear where she stands:

“I don’t think we’re giving each other’s secrets away!”

Contrast this with the attitude of New Zealand’s Sophie Devine, who spoke to us in the run-up to KSL:

“I don’t care that Georgia [Elwiss] plays for England and I play for New Zealand – for me that goes out the window and it’s just about playing cricket. And if we can help each other get better and if we can help the county players get better, then surely that’s going to be better for the women’s game in general.”

Maybe Devine’s perspective is simply reflective of the reality that, in an age of video analysis, there can’t really be secrets any more… at least not ones that last for more than 5 minutes out in the middle?

But it is also interesting to consider that this more open mindset comes from a New Zealander – the country that, more than any other, seems to be encouraging its stars to embrace the world of the modern, globetrotting, supranational cricketer.

And then you ask yourself: which team are on the up right now, increasingly at the top of many people’s lists of favourites for the World Cup in England next year?

New Zealand, of course!

Coincidence? Perhaps!

Or perhaps not!

With Kent already this year’s County Champions, there was only glory to play for in their final game of the season at Beckenham; but that seemed to be enough of an incentive, as they bowled Berkshire out for 139 to secure victory by 26 runs.

Berkshire were chasing a low total – 166 – on a pitch which had little in it for the bowlers; it was a match situation that required little more than steady accumulation, but Berkshire’s batsmen played in a way that was as baffling as the Beckenham electronic scoreboard, which appeared to have a mind of its own, adding or subtracting runs from Berkshire’s total seemingly at will in a way that bore little resemblance to action on the field of play.

For Berkshire, the dismissals of Rachel Priest (6) – who holed out to Suzie Bates at mid-off – and Heather Knight (0) – who sent a leading edge to Grace Gibbs at extra cover – set the tone; Lissy Macleod, too, looked well on her way to leading Berkshire’s rebuild, but skied a ball she could easily have left alone to Tammy Beaumont at short third man when on 24.

Had everyone played like Sherisa Gumbs (33), who punished anything short or wide from the Kent bowlers, Berkshire would probably have won the match; instead they were bowled out for 139 in the 43rd over of their innings.

It was a disappointing follow-up to what had been a good performance by the Berkshire bowlers, after Lydia Greenway – captaining in place of Charlotte Edwards, who was sitting out today’s match injured – won the toss and elected to bat. Lauren Bell (3-40) caused Kent early problems with a rapid opening spell, continuing to cement her reputation for big-name scalps, this time trapping Tammy Beaumont lbw in the very first over of the day. Her next wicket was none other than Wisden’s 2016 Leading Female Cricketer in the World, Suzie Bates (22), who was caught by Knight at slip, chasing an away-swinger she really should have left alone.

It was left to Kent’s younger players to rebuild, which they did admirably, the highlight being a fluent 31 from Alice Davidson-Richards, who Edwards described as “one of Kent’s standout performers [of the season]”. Ultimately, too, the 33-run 9th-wicket partnership between 18-year-olds Emily Thompson (21*) and Phoebe Franklin (10) proved crucial.

After play, Charlotte Edwards reflected on Kent’s successful season, telling CRICKETher:

“It’s been a brilliant summer with a brilliant group of people, and the win today was a really pleasing way to finish the season.”

“It’s always a cliche, people say it’s been a team performance, but it really has been for Kent. We have got England players and we’ve got some of the best players in the world in our team, but everyone’s performed at different points throughout the season for our team.”

“I just love playing for Kent, I always have done. I’m looking forward to the winter and then coming back next season.”

A few English clubs seem to have been contacted overnight by email regarding a “Women’s Premier League” in India:

“We are proud to announce that Knights Sports and Events Private Limited is organizing India’s 1st T20 Cricket League exclusively for Women by the name of Women’s Premier League.”

The email concludes:

“We would like to take this opportunity to extend an invitation to your club to participate in this tournament. As mentioned, this is a by invitation tournament and all expenses once your team arrives in India shall be taken care off ranging from Playing Kits, Hotel, Food, and Transport.”

Having spoken to contacts in India, we are fairly confident that this is at best totally unofficial and at worst a scam.

(We will updated this post if any other evidence emerges to the contrary!)

In Division 2 of the Women’s County Championship, with 2 teams to be promoted to Div 1, and 2 to be relegated to Div 3, there is everything to play for going into the final weekend of fixtures.

Only one team already know where they will play next year – everyone else is in the mix for promotion or relegation, and indeed one side could still be either promoted or relegated!

[1] Worst = The lowest points total possible for this team.
[2] Best = The highest points total possible.

At the bottom of the table, Essex are the one county who already know their fate – the best they can finish on is 6.4, and the worst Worcestershire can get is 7.5, so Essex are relegated whatever.

The key relegation scrap then is between Worcestershire and Leicestershire – they are closer than they look, because Leicestershire have had 2 abandonments to Worcestershire’s one, meaning on average each point is worth more to Leicestershire at this stage, so it might well come down to bonus points between them.

In the promotion battle, Lancashire, Nottinghamshire and Wales all have their fate in their own hands. Lancashire and Wales play each other, but it isn’t quite as simple as “winner takes it all” – Wales need to get a bag of bonus points on the board, or they will still be relying on others to slip up.

Meanwhile, Hampshire need to get a win with near-maximum bonus points and hope others don’t; but Hampshire’s advantage is that they play Essex – the only side in the division without a win this season.

The most interesting case is Devon – they could be relegated if they lose badly to Leicestershire, and Worcestershire also get a big win… but they could also theoretically be promoted if lots of other results fall in their favour.

UPDATE: For Devon to be promoted requires them to get 18 at least 17 points, both Lancashire and Nottinghamshire to lose with zero bonus points and Hampshire to lose with 4 or fewer bonus points. (Lancs and Notts both getting zero bonus points is the unlikely bit – they only need to get 75 runs or take 3 wickets for a BP!)

This is the somewhat complicated situation as we think it stands for the bottom 4 – Middlesex, Surrey, Staffs and Somerset – 3 of whom go down.

(NB Berkshire have already accrued enough bonus points that they are definitely safe, even if they take no points at all from their final match with Kent.)

Middlesex have to play Staffs, and will stay up if they win, or even if they lose providing they get 5 bonus points.

Surrey are already down because they can no longer overtake Middlesex under any circumstances – even if they win their remaining match (v Sussex) with maximum bonus points, they will finish on just 8.0 points, but the least Middlesex can finish on is 8.3 points.

Staffs have their destiny (mostly – see below) in their own hands – if they beat Middlesex with full bonus points and keep Middlesex to a maximum of 4 bonus points, they will have 9 points, and therefore overtake Middlesex, who would have c. 8.3-8.9 points, depending on exactly how many bonus points they actually got.

Somerset meanwhile first need Staffs to beat Middlesex, but without Staffs getting the maximum bonus points and with Middlesex getting 4 or fewer bonus points, leaving both Middlesex and Staffs on 8-point-something points. If Somerset then beat Warwickshire with full bonus points, they will have the 9 points they need to overtake both Middlesex and Staffs to survive.

There is also one other potentially interesting scenario – if both Staffs and Somerset end up with 9 points, we go to the match between them… which was abandoned… so it then goes to Net Run Rate, which is currently in Staff’s favour, by 0.77 r/o!

Got that? (Good… ‘cos we’re not sure we have!!)

Although the table on Play Cricket is definitely wrong at the time of writing (the bonus points aren’t right) it looks like results yesterday mean that Kent have won the Women’s County Championship for the 7th time.

(Update: The correct table is here on Cricket Archive, which confirms that our numbers below are right.)

Kent had the day off yesterday, but both their closest challengers lost – Sussex to Berkshire and Warwickshire to Middlesex – meaning Kent’s lead is now unassailable.

This means a One Day and T20 “double” for Kent, and a unique “triple” for Charlotte Edwards, Suzie Bates, Lydia Greenway and Tash Farrant, who also won the Kia Super League with the Southern Vipers.

So it will be “trebles all round” and another trip to Buckingham Palace for Edwards and co… though it will be interesting to see if it is with the Vipers or with Kent, now that the County Champs is probably no longer considered the “premier” women’s domestic competition.

Mathsy stuff follows…

(We have double checked it, and we think it is correct!!)

Kent currently have 116 points from 7 completed games, with one to play, meaning the worst average they can finish with is 14.5 ^[1].

Warwickshire have 62* points from 5 games with one to play, so the best they can finish with is 13.3 ^[2].

Sussex have 63* points from 5 games with two to play, meaning the best they can end up with is 14.1 ^[3].

—————-

* Including the bonus points which we think are missing on Play Cricket! (Update: Cricket Archive agrees with us.)

[1] 116 + 0 = 116 / 8 = 14.5

[2] 62 + 18 = 80 / 6 = 13.3

[3] 63 + 18 + 18 = 99 / 7 = 14.1

Berkshire’s Carla Rudd starred with the bat as the Beavers beat Sussex by 34 runs at North Maidenhead to ensure their survival in Division 1.

Having elected to bowl first – a decision which looked sensible to the visiting eye, but apparently left the locals raising their eyebrows – Sussex were set a total of 277 to chase, and made a strong start, as Georgias Adams (75) and Elwiss (37) and Izzy Collis (34) played positive cricket at the top of the innings, using the powerplay as a launchpad to set the visitors on course at 133-1 off the first 20 overs.

Berkshire needed some luck, and they arguably got it when Collis was inexplicably given out stumped off Linsey Smith, despite being apparently clearly back in her ground.

Smith then went on to take the wickets of Adams (caught by Fi Morris) and Danni Wyatt (caught by Heather Knight for 12) in a crucial spell which tipped the game back in Berkshire’s favour. An unbeaten 43 from Abi Freeborn proved in vain as Berkshire’s attack shared-around the 9 wickets they needed for maximum bonus points, leaving Sussex 34 short at the close, on 243-9.

But it was earlier in the day that the game had really been won, as Berkshire posted 277-6 from their 50 overs. Rachel Priest (52), Sherissa Gumbs (43) and Heather Knight (50) all contributed, but it was a marvellous 79 off 71 balls from Carla Rudd, coming in at 4 to make her highest score in senior cricket, which was the difference between the teams.

Rudd, who had shown promise as a junior but never quite “made it” as a batsman in senior cricket until today, grew in confidence as her innings progressed, finding the boundary with everything from powerful pulls through midwicket, to dinky scoops over the head of the keeper, before eventually falling to the arm of Danni Wyatt, who ran her out with a direct hit from the edge of the circle at cover.

Afterwards we spoke to Rudd, who told us how important the victory was for Berkshire:

“It was a needed win, to make sure we stay up in the 50-Over County Championship, and it was nice to get it today, so we don’t have to rely on the Kent game next week.”

Rudd partly credits her new-found form to working with former England Test batsman Jason Gallian, who is a fellow coach at Felstead School:

“I’ve spent a lot of time with Jason this winter, doing one-to-one stuff, and I feel like I’ve got a different batting mindset and a few more shots that I can use out on the wicket, so it was nice for me to finally spend a bit of time out there and get some runs on the board.”

“There was a lot of turn out there, especially later on, but once you got in the ball was coming on to the bat quite nicely, and if it was short it was sitting up and ‘holding’ so it was nice, especially playing square of the wicket.”

Going into the final two rounds of the County Championship, 5 sides are in danger of relegation from Division 1: Berkshire, Middlesex and Somerset with 2 wins apiece; Surrey with 1; and Staffs, who have yet to win a game. (Remember – 3 sides are relegated this season!)

Berkshire are in the driving seat, as they have racked-up more bonus points than the other threatened teams; but they also have the toughest run-in – they play Sussex today and Kent on the final day. A win on either day would see them safe; but if not it will come down other results, in which case Staffs could do them a favour by beating Surrey today.

Middlesex play Warwickshire today and Staffs on the final day. Like Berkshire, they need to win one of these games, but they will feel confident about beating Staffs on the final day, so they should be safe.

Somerset have Yorkshire and Warwickshire. Broken record alert… they too need to win at least one of these games – but they are already dependent on other results – if Middlesex beat Warwickshire today, they likely need to win both their remaining matches.

Surrey have Staffs, plus a re-arranged game against Sussex. They need to win both matches, or they will almost certainly go down.

Staffs have Surrey and Middlesex. Although they are currently winless with just 9 points (to Berkshire’s 53), the average points system means they can theoretically survive if they win both their remaining games and if everyone else in the relegation zone loses all theirs – unlikely, but stranger things have happened!

The dust may have barely settled over “Battlefield Chelmsford”, but over at Lords thoughts are quickly turning to KSL 2.0, which has already been penciled-into the calendar, with the same six teams contesting a One Day competition in the weeks leading up to the World Cup, and the Twenty20s in a block afterwards.

Whilst the broad picture is clear, there are a lot of details still to be confirmed, as the ECB embark upon a “comprehensive review” of this year’s competition, taking feedback from everyone involved – including the fans, who can have their say by filling out the survey here!

Rumours abound that one thing we may see next year is a “reshuffle” of the teams, and CRICKETher can confirm that not only is this under consideration, but the ECB are also not currently ruling out the possibility of key players competing in different colours in the One Day and T20 competitions.

The desire to keep the competition balanced is a laudable one, certainly from the perspective of the ECB’s goal of “bridging the gap”; but one area where the KSL has been successful well beyond expectations is in building fanbases – plural!

Prior to the competition, we were asked what “success” might look like in terms of match attendances – we mused that an average “gate” of 500 would be pretty good, given that the number of spectators at a typical county match can often be counted on the fingers of one hand.

That the KSL has far exceeded that, is as much as anything down to the hard yards the players put in – visiting clubs, holding coaching sessions, and working the local media. Loyalties were created; but they are still fragile, and they could be torn apart in a moment – and the easiest way of doing that would be to “rob” a young fan of her favourite player; or (worse still) to give her a new favourite player in the One Day competition… and then snatch her away again in the T20s.

Not to mention that the players generally don’t want to move either – they’ve nailed their colours to their masts, as Charlotte Edwards made pretty clear to us in our interview:

“Don’t try and move any of us… everyone is firmly in allegiance with their team!”

Over the longer term, of course, it might have to happen, but moving key players should be a last resort – not least because right now it isn’t even clear that the KSL is “unbalanced” – no team lost all their games, and no team won them all either. Even Lancashire Thunder, who perhaps looked most in need of “bolstering”, having lost their key England player – Sarah Taylor – could so easily have been a very different story, if Danni Wyatt (average 8) and Hayley Matthews (4) had lived up to expectations with the bat.

Building a brand new competition from scratch is a massive challenge – you aren’t going to get everything right, but in the case of KSL the ECB have gotten pretty damn close. Now, like a fine wine, it just needs time to mature… and that won’t happen if you spend too much time opening up the barrell and mixing stuff around!

For our Team of the Tournament we’ve stuck to the same rules as the KSL itself: 3 overseas and 3 England, with the remainder selected from amongst the county and Academy players.

We’ve tried to pick players in their natural batting position – meaning (unluckily) no spot for Lancashire Thunder opener Emma Lamb – and to include a balanced bowling attack of seamers and spinners.

1. Stafanie Taylor (WS / O)
2. Suzie Bates * (SV / O)
3. Heather Knight (WS / E)
4. Nat Sciver (SS /E)
5. Arran Brindle (SV)
6. Ellyse Perry (LL / O)
7. Katherine Brunt (YD /E)
8. Carla Rudd + (SV)
9. Freya Davies (WS)
10. Alex Hartley (SS)
11. Linsey Smith (SV)

O = Overseas; E = England

The top of the batting order pretty-much picks itself – Stafanie Taylor and our captain, Suzie Bates, were the outstanding players of the tournament; whilst Heather Knight and Nat Sciver were the best performing England players in our batting rankings.

For the all-rounders, we’ve gone for Arran Brindle who had a great tournament with the ball and contributed some quick runs coming in late with the bat; Ellyse Perry, who started poorly, but whose class came-good over the competition as a whole; and Katherine Brunt, who showed she really is an all-rounder at this level, contributing vital runs as well as her usual wickets for the Diamonds.

Carla Rudd is our glove-butler, having had a very tidy tournament behind the stumps for the Southern Vipers, also contributing 4 dismissals – all stumpings.

Finally for our bowlers, we’ve selected a seamer – Freya Davies, who took 5 wickets at a very respectable economy rate of 7.4 for an opening bowler; and two spinners – Alex Hartley and Linsey Smith, whose 4-10 for the Vipers versus the Diamonds were the best figures for a spinner in the tournament.