By Josh Cockburn

While England men seem to pick their teams primarily on height and vibes, the increased use of data in cricket means that we do have a lot more information that we can rely on to assess players. Of course there are lies, damned lies and statistics and you need to watch games not just scorecards and spreadsheets to judge players, but over time I’d rather have the batters with the best strike rates not the best looking cover drives.

I have combined all performances from the Women’s Hundred, WBBL, WPL and CWPL as well as international matches played by England, Australia, India, West Indies, South Africa and New Zealand in the last 12 months (from August 2023 to August 2024). I’ve not included Pakistan, Bangladesh or any other country with no representation in those leagues as we only have their international averages which are easily available. I’ve not done Sri Lanka either, but I have done Chamari Athapaththu given the amount of cricket around the world she has played.

I’ve not included the Charlotte Edwards Cup, WNCL, SuperSmash or any other leagues which are overwhelmingly competed for without high quality overseas players. There are some issues with comparing between leagues – the WPL was considerably faster scoring than the CPL, but broadly speaking the standards are similar – the CPL might have had the weakest overseas player contingent, but the international players who did compete there didn’t do substantially better there than they did in the other leagues – because it was lower scoring the bowlers tended to improve their figures while the batters saw theirs deteriorate. It’s less useful for analysing players who haven’t played international cricket and only played in one franchise league – especially those who did very well in that league like Lauren Smith or Amy Edgar in the WBBL or Freya Davies in the Hundred.

For the international data I’ve included all players who have batted or bowled at least 12 times or though I’ve included a few players in the national discussions with slightly less appearances.

England

Squad	Innings	Runs	Balls	Avg	SR
S Ecclestone	19	153	106	13.91	144.34
D Gibson	26	353	251	20.76	140.64
A Jones	36	585	425	20.17	137.65
D Wyatt	22	577	425	27.48	135.76
N Sciver-Brunt	20	967	731	53.72	132.28
H Knight	40	1005	803	38.65	125.16
M Bouchier	38	722	592	19.51	121.96
S Dunkley	31	491	421	16.93	116.63
A Capsey	46	1046	924	23.24	113.20
B Heath	23	225	201	11.25	111.94
F Kemp	18	131	120	8.73	109.17
C Dean	13	130	126	14.44	103.17
Contenders
P Scholfield	8	190	138	27.14	137.68
C Griffith	10	100	77	10.00	129.87
T Beaumont	25	531	449	22.13	118.26
G Scrivens	8	157	139	19.63	112.95
G Adams	13	101	112	11.22	90.18
H Armitage	8	62	69	7.75	89.86
B Smith	20	192	220	9.60	87.27

Squad	Innings	Balls	Runs	Wickets	Avg	ER
S Glenn	29	577	565	41	13.78	5.88
S Ecclestone	28	612	668	40	16.70	6.55
L Smith	22	470	516	28	18.43	6.59
A Capsey	21	296	343	16	21.44	6.95
C Dean	27	516	604	26	23.23	7.02
H Knight	13	150	180	5	36.00	7.20
L Bell	21	416	500	26	19.23	7.21
N Sciver-Brunt	28	491	609	25	24.36	7.44
D Gibson	35	588	760	25	30.40	7.76
F Kemp	12	173	271	9	30.11	9.40
Contenders
F Davies	8	140	132	11	12.00	5.66
R Slater	8	105	114	5	22.80	6.51
L Filer	13	247	276	10	27.60	6.70
M Villiers	9	132	149	6	24.83	6.77
K Levick	7	129	154	10	15.40	7.16
So. Smale	9	151	181	9	20.11	7.19
C Pavely	7	135	162	9	18.00	7.20
G Adams	15	188	227	9	25.22	7.24
E Gray	10	135	164	9	18.22	7.29
R MacDonald-Gay	9	140	175	8	21.88	7.50
H Baker	7	110	141	4	35.25	7.69
G Davis	8	140	180	10	18.00	7.71
E Arlott	7	135	185	11	16.82	8.22
M Corteen-Coleman	8	135	186	6	31.00	8.27
K Cross	10	170	235	8	29.38	8.29
K Gordon	8	140	194	3	64.67	8.31

England’s batting problems are fairly obviously at the top of the order. Wyatt’s figures are fine, but neither Bouchier or Dunkley have great figures – you’d probably be tempted to go with Bouchier as the marginally faster scorer. Tammy Beaumont has very similar figures to them both, I guess England have gone for Dunkley’s room to improve over Beaumont’s experience. Winfield-Hill had a poor 12 months, and doesn’t look like she’s in line for a comeback. Then Alice Capsey at 3 where a player renowned for fast scoring has spent a year with the lowest SR of any front line batter. England really need her to rediscover some of that uninhibited hitting as they don’t need solidity from number 3, they need dynamism.

Sciver-Brunt’s brilliance goes without saying at number 4. Knight’s had the best 12 months of her T20 career in my opinion, able to score fast as well as heavily. Previously you’d be reassured by her coming in at a crisis but not excited by her coming in with the run rate needing boosting, but she’s fulfilled both roles this year. From those who haven’t been selected, Paige Scholfield has much the best record and probably should be next in line for a batting place.

Amy Jones has done really well and has exactly the sort of figures you’d hope for from your number 6. For the all rounder slot, Danni Gibson outperforms Freya Kemp by a mile in batting terms (we’ll come to bowling shortly).

Also worth noting is that Ecclestone’s SR is one of the best in the world. Stats can be deceiving, and we’ve seen occasions when she’s been promoted and she’s looked a bit hapless, but her boundary striking ability shouldn’t be underestimated – she clearly doesn’t herself judging by when she’s come in to bat for Originals this summer.

Looking at the bowling, it’s clear why England have gone spin heavy, and it’s not just anticipating spin friendly pitches in Bangladesh then UAE. With the exception of Davies and Filer (neither of whom made the squad), basically every spinner that England might choose from (including Georgia Adams and Katie Levick who aren’t really part of the conversation as well as Capsey’s part-time spin) is more economical than the seamers. This isn’t something inherent to T20, brought about by fast bowlers bowling more in powerplays and at the death or something, it’s not the case for India or Australia. For whatever reasons, England’s spinners are better than their seamers at T20 currently.

Ecclestone and Glenn have world class figures – especially Glenn who is in the top 5 in the world for both average and economy. I don’t think Glenn gets enough recognition for the quality of her performances, hopefully she can demonstrate it on a global stage at the World Cup. Linsey Smith clearly outperforms Charlie Dean for the third spinner. Dean being an off spinner may count ahead of playing a second left armer, but Capsey actually has better figures than Dean if England just need an offspin option for particular matchups.

As for the faster bowlers, Davies was very economical for the Fire in the Hundred, it’s a shame she didn’t play any international cricket or other franchise leagues to give us more data to judge her current level, and she didn’t have a great Charlotte Edwards Cup. Otherwise, in the choice between Lauren’s for the new ball, Bell has a much better average than Filer, and although Filer has the better economy rate you can see why England would value Bell’s ability to get wickets early on. Filer would clearly be a useful option to have and I’d be very surprised if she hadn’t been picked if a 16 player squad had been chosen. Kate Cross can’t have any complaints at her exclusion on her T20 form this year. Sciver-Brunt is a bit more expensive than you’d want as a second seamer, assuming she’s fit to take on that role. England had better hope she is, as neither Gibson or Kemp have figures that inspire confidence, both averaging over 30 this year and with high economy rates, (stratospheric in Kemp’s case) as well as their own fitness issues. Spin to win for England then.

Australia

Squad	Innings	Runs	Balls	Avg	SR
G Harris	30	795	511	31.80	155.58
G Wareham	31	575	409	26.14	140.59
A Healy	20	543	398	28.58	136.43
B Mooney	42	1397	1048	43.66	133.30
A Sutherland	28	573	433	23.88	132.33
P Litchfield	37	768	588	24.77	130.61
E Perry	40	1297	1007	41.84	128.80
T McGrath	30	624	525	24.96	118.86
A Gardner	39	666	577	18.50	115.42
A King	16	132	123	14.67	107.32
Contenders
L Harris	12	122	60	10.17	203.33
J Jonassen	33	462	352	14.00	131.25
M Lanning	30	785	641	27.07	122.46
K Mack	15	452	381	30.13	118.64
G Redmayne	27	589	560	23.56	105.18

Squad	Innings	Balls	Runs	Wickets	Avg	ER
K Garth	24	507	548	17	32.24	6.49
M Schutt	26	564	612	30	20.40	6.51
A Sutherland	37	717	780	40	19.50	6.53
S Molineux	13	300	328	18	18.22	6.56
A King	23	464	529	26	20.35	6.84
E Perry	26	365	419	31	13.52	6.89
G Wareham	43	841	1009	39	25.87	7.20
A Gardner	42	866	1081	51	21.20	7.49
T McGrath	22	291	377	17	22.18	7.77
G Harris	17	191	252	7	36.00	7.92
Contenders
L Smith	8	150	146	11	13.27	5.84
A Wellington	24	449	458	33	13.88	6.12
L Cheatle	21	443	473	28	16.89	6.41
A Edgar	15	286	322	20	16.10	6.76
H Graham	21	396	503	25	20.12	7.62
J Jonassen	38	780	970	52	18.65	7.46

For Australia, the two main talking points have been the inclusion of Brown and Vlaeminck despite practically no top-level cricket in the last year and the exclusion of Jess Jonassen. As this article is primarily a statistical analysis of top-level cricket in the last year, I can’t assess Brown and Vlaeminck’s inclusion except to note that at their best they are very dangerous bowlers and the do allow Australia that fabled point of difference. More crucially, the fact Australia have 6 other bowlers who conceded less than 7 runs an over in the last year, plus Wareham, Gardner and McGrath means that they have plenty of alternatives if the gamble doesn’t pay off.

On statistical grounds, Jonassen can’t really complain about her omission. Her economy rate is 23rd among all the Aussie bowlers in the sample, below 7 bowlers in the squad, and only above Gardner and McGrath. Her average is much better – only worse than Perry and Molineux in the squad, but only marginally better than her rivals for a place in the squad. Wellington has a much better claim to be in the squad/team for her bowling and although her batting isn’t as good, it’s perfectly fine for a number 8 or 9.

For the batting, Healy and Mooney are certain of their places and both had good seasons. Perry has had a really strong season too, speeding up her scoring while maintaining a high average. Depending on how many all-rounders Australia play, they may only choose one of Grace Harris or Litchfield. If that is the case then I suspect they might go for the younger player, though Harris probably has been the outstanding T20 batter of the year, one of only two batters to have a SR of over a run and a half per ball, while maintaining a decent average of 31. The only batter with a higher SR was her sister, Laura managing over 2 runs a ball which basically puts her on a different level to the rest of the women’s game at the moment. However, Laura Harris only just averaged over 10 and that’s not enough runs to get picked however fast they are scored, especially for Australia. There’s no-one else from out of the squad who has produced the sort of elite performances that would warrant inclusion as a batter – even Meg Lanning.

What I would question is whether either Tahlia McGrath or Ashleigh Gardner is worth their places in the team. Both are top all rounders of course, but in the past year they have been substantially out- performed by Perry, Sutherland and Wareham in both batting and bowling. McGrath is vice-captain and Gardner obviously has masses of credit in the bank so I’d be surprised if they don’t play, but on form I think Australia’s team should have looked something like this (assuming they include one of Brown or Vlaeminck). Cheatle and Schutt basically have identical economy rates over the year, but Cheatle has a better average.

Healy
Mooney
G Harris
Perry
Litchfield
Sutherland
Wareham
Wellington
Molineux
Cheatle/Schutt
Brown/Vlaeminck

India

Squad	Innings	Runs	Balls	Avg	SR
R Ghosh	27	616	435	32.42	141.61
Sh Verma	30	894	649	34.38	137.75
S Sajana	10	117	86	19.50	136.05
J Rodrigues	28	663	512	36.83	129.49
D Sharma	21	572	449	71.50	127.39
D Hemalatha	15	301	240	25.08	125.42
S Mandhana	35	999	808	31.22	123.64
Y Bhatia	9	240	197	26.67	121.83
H Kaur	35	863	738	31.96	116.94
P Vastrakar	16	100	117	9.09	85.47
Contenders
K Navgire	8	110	75	13.75	146.67
A Kaur	11	89	66	17.80	134.85
S Meghana	6	168	149	33.6	112.75
S Sehrawat	7	108	106	15.43	101.89

Squad	Innings	Balls	Runs	Wickets	Avg	ER
D Sharma	37	797	820	44	18.64	6.17
R Yadav	22	438	488	32	15.25	6.68
R Singh	25	522	600	21	28.57	6.90
P Vastrakar	29	542	630	31	20.32	6.97
S Patil	20	381	457	29	15.76	7.20
A Sobhana	13	222	267	16	16.69	7.22
A Reddy	12	243	304	11	27.64	7.51
H Kaur	11	107	136	9	15.11	7.63
Contenders
T Sadhu	9	162	147	9	16.33	5.44
T Kanwar	12	270	283	11	25.73	6.29
S Pandey	14	309	363	13	27.92	7.05
S Ishaque	12	210	270	14	19.29	7.71
R Gayakwad	10	203	265	9	29.44	7.83
M Singh	8	144	242	5	48.40	10.08

For India, Ghosh and Verma are their fastest batters and both average over 30 so they are obvious selections. Deepti has had an astonishingly good year in franchise cricket averaging over 100 and scoring at 134. International form has not been nearly as good, dragging her down to a mere average of 71 and SR of 127, but that’s still elite figures – it is bemusing that no-one picked her up in the WBBL draft. The rest of their batting is all very similar with SRs in the 120s (compared to the Aussies who are mainly in the 130s). Harmanpreet has only managed 116.94 so it’s less surprising she was passed over in the WBBL, though Mandhana is only slightly quicker. There’s not many alternatives out of the squad who have performed better. Kiran Navgire might have been worth a place as she scored at 146 even with a low average.

Among the bowlers, Sadhu is one of a handful of bowlers to have conceded less than a run a ball in T20 this year, and probably deserves a place. Tanuja Kanwar also put up some very good figures, but the competition for places among Indian bowlers is fierce. Deepti is world class again. Radha Yadav, Renuka Singh and Pooja Vastrakar all went at under 7 rpo, with Yadav having the best average. Patil and Sobhana were more expensive but still have very good averages. Probably the luckiest bowler to get in is Reddy but there’s not a huge queue of Indian seamers behind her – indeed Meghna Singh who might have been in the running in the past had a very poor tournament for Gujarat. Shihka Pandey could have come in for her though. India’s main issue is that (Deepti apart) they lack allrounders. Harmanpreet is the only batter who has bowled much this year, and only Vastrakar of the bowlers has had much batting. Vastrakar has traditionally been called upon when a bit of tail end hitting is required but she’s had a very bad season with the bat, averaging below 10 and scoring at below a run a ball.

West Indies

Squad	Innings	Runs	Balls	Avg	SR
H Matthews	27	1403	1149	34.22	122.11
D Dottin	5	119	109	23.80	109.17
S Taylor	9	216	211	27.00	102.37
A Alleyne	30	114	121	10.36	94.21
Q Joseph	10	151	161	15.10	93.79
S Campbelle	28	243	260	22.09	93.46
C Henry	21	49	62	9.80	79.03
C Nation	15	94	124	9.40	75.81

Squad	Innings	Balls	Runs	Wickets	Avg	ER
Q Joseph	10	192	173	9	19.22	5.41
A Fletcher	11	214	235	16	14.69	6.59
A Alleyne	15	268	296	15	19.73	6.63
C Henry	11	144	159	7	22.71	6.63
H Matthews	47	949	1124	56	20.07	7.11
K Ramharack	13	246	295	10	29.5	7.2
S Connell	11	162	221	10	22.10	8.19
Z James	9	96	151	2	75.5	9.44

You don’t need recourse to statistics to know the West Indies have problems with batting – but they do lay bare how deep the problems are. Taking Matthews out of the equation (and while her figures are fine they are a bit short of the best batters globally), none of their batters who have played enough qualifying innings manage to score at over a run a ball, and Campbelle is the only batter among them to average over 20. No surprise then that they are hoping Taylor and Dottin can roll back the years. The bowling looks much better, Fletcher and Joseph have fine figures, and Alleyne, Henry, Matthews and Ramharack are reasonably economical. The only qualifier is that a lot of those figures come from the low scoring CPL plus a middling international calendar (5 matches vs Pakistan, 3 apiece against Australia and Sri Lanka), only Matthews has been playing in the other leagues.

New Zealand

Squad	Innings	Runs	Balls	Avg	SR
S Devine	43	990	771	26.05	128.40
J Kerr	13	88	70	9.78	125.71
A Kerr	35	940	768	32.41	122.40
I Gaze	10	111	102	13.88	108.82
S Bates	31	580	579	20.00	100.17
M Green	15	190	199	19.00	95.48
B Halliday	11	162	174	16.20	93.10

Squad	Innings	Balls	Runs	Wickets	Avg	ER
F Jonas	14	294	339	11	30.82	6.92
E Carson	7	132	162	7	23.14	7.36
J Kerr	11	230	292	4	73.00	7.62
A Kerr	34	699	896	30	29.87	7.69
L Tahuhu	11	180	258	10	25.80	8.60
S Devine	34	536	773	27	28.63	8.65
H Rowe	9	114	181	5	36.20	9.53

New Zealand have obviously slipped in recent years with their great players retiring or declining and not being adequately replaced. Devine and Amelie Kerr both have respectable figures, but neither can manage the 130 SR that seems to be the elite level for women’s T20 at the moment. Bates sadly has dropped to mediocrity with a SR of just a run a ball and would surely be in line for being replaced was anyone else doing better, but the three other qualifying NZ batters (Gaze, Green and Halliday) all average sub-20 and only Gaze scores at (marginally) above a run a ball. Only Jonas averages under 7 rpo among the bowlers and Tahuhu, Devine and Rowe all average above 8.5. Carson and the Kerr sisters return respectable economy rates in the 7po range but nothing that would frighten the opposition. Jess Kerr may want to claim bragging rights for being above her sister for both SR and ER.

South Africa

Squad	Innings	Runs	Balls	Avg	SR
N De Klerk	13	154	113	25.67	136.28
C Tryon	33	592	465	21.93	127.31
M Kapp	36	720	568	24.83	126.76
L Wolvaardt	42	1378	1126	37.24	122.38
A Bosch	12	326	267	27.17	122.10
T Brits	16	527	443	35.13	118.96
S Luus	13	176	159	19.56	110.69
Unavailable
L Lee	13	409	280	37.18	146.07
M Du Preez	17	382	309	23.88	123.62

Squad	Innings	Balls	Runs	Wickets	Avg	ER
M Kapp	39	825	803	36	22.31	5.84
C Tryon	34	571	634	28	22.64	6.66
N Mlaba	17	300	353	9	39.22	7.06
M Klaas	14	248	305	10	30.50	7.38
N De Klerk	14	269	357	13	27.46	7.96
T Sekhukhune	7	132	186	7	26.57	8.45
A Khaka	10	212	309	3	103.00	8.75
Unavailable
S Ismail	29	640	619	35	17.69	5.80

South Africa with all their players available would be a very dangerous side. Kapp is probably the best T20 quick bowler in the world right now, averaging 22 and conceding less than a run a ball, but there’s not much penetration elsewhere. Mlaba, Tryon and Klaas are economical enough, but don’t take enough wickets (Tryon’s figures got a big boost by taking 8 wickets for 66 runs in the WCPL) while de Klerk, Sekhukhune and Khaka are all pretty expensive. Add Ismail’s 17.69 average and 5.8 ER and things suddenly would look much better.

In batting, Wolvaardt averages 37 and has shown improvements in scoring quicker but a strike rate of 122 makes her a good anchor, but needing runs to come fast at the other end. However, only de Klerk scored at faster than 130 with Tryon, Kapp and Bosch all in the 120s. Luus struggling with a SR of 110 and a sub 20 average doesn’t help. Getting Lizelle Lee back who averaged 37 with a SR of 146 in the WBBL surely would.

Conclusion

Now putting all the data together to find the most effective players in world T20 over the last year. Players in bold are in the World Cup squads.

Best Strike Rate

	Batter	Nat	Inns	Runs	BF	Avg	SR
1	L Harris	Aus	12	122	60	10.17	203.33
2	G Harris	Aus	30	795	511	31.80	155.58
3	L Lee	SA	13	409	280	37.18	146.07
4	S Ecclestone	Eng	19	153	106	13.91	144.34
5	R Ghosh	Ind	27	616	435	32.42	141.61
6	D Gibson	Eng	26	353	251	20.76	140.64
7	G Wareham	Aus	31	575	409	26.14	140.59
8	Sh Verma	Ind	30	894	649	34.38	137.75
9	A Jones	Eng	36	585	425	20.17	137.65
10	A Healy	Aus	20	543	398	28.58	136.43
11	N De Klerk	SA	13	154	113	25.67	136.28
12	D Wyatt	Eng	22	577	425	27.48	135.76
13	H Graham	Aus	19	276	204	21.23	135.29
14	C Knott	Aus	20	315	233	19.69	135.19
15	B Mooney	Aus	42	1397	1048	43.66	133.30
16	A Sutherland	Aus	28	573	433	23.88	132.33
17	N Sciver-Brunt	Eng	20	967	731	53.72	132.28
18	J Jonassen	Aus	33	462	352	14.00	131.25
19	P Litchfield	Aus	37	768	588	24.77	130.61
20	J Rodrigues	Ind	28	663	512	36.83	129.49

Dominated by Australians who fill half the top 20, England have 5 representatives, India 3.

Best Average

	Batter	Nat	Inns	Runs	BF	Avg	SR
1	D Sharma	Ind	21	572	449	71.50	127.39
2	N Sciver-Brunt	Eng	20	967	731	53.72	132.28
3	B Mooney	Aus	42	1397	1048	43.66	133.30
4	E Perry	Aus	40	1297	1007	41.84	128.80
5	H Knight	Eng	40	1005	803	38.65	125.16
6	L Wolvaardt	SA	42	1378	1126	37.24	122.38
7	L Lee	SA	13	409	280	37.18	146.07
8	J Rodrigues	Ind	28	663	512	36.83	129.49
9	E Villani	Aus	12	324	279	36.00	116.13
10	T Brits	SA	16	527	443	35.13	118.96
11	A Athapaththu	SL	51	1615	1317	35.11	122.63
12	S Verma	Ind	30	894	649	34.38	137.75
13	H Matthews	WI	47	1403	1149	34.22	122.11
14	R Ghosh	Ind	27	616	435	32.42	141.61
15	A Kerr	NZ	35	940	768	32.41	122.40
16	H Kaur	Ind	35	863	738	31.96	116.94
17	G Harris	Aus	30	795	511	31.80	155.58
18	S Mandhana	Ind	35	999	808	31.22	123.64
19	K Mack	Aus	15	452	381	30.13	118.64
20	T Wilson	Aus	13	323	273	29.36	118.32

This is much more widely spread around geographically and is probably closer to what most people would say are the best batters in women’s cricket, but it is debatable how useful it is to a T20 team to average over 30 if you are scoring at under 120. The best batters at the moment, appearing on both lists are Grace Harris, Richa Ghosh, Shafali Verma, Beth Mooney, Nat Sciver-Brunt and Jemima Rodrigues.

Best Economy Rate

		Nat	Inns	Balls	Runs	Wkts	AVG	ER
1	S Ismail	SA	29	640	619	35	17.69	5.80
2	A Wellington	Aus	29	563	546	38	14.37	5.82
3	M Kapp	SA	39	825	803	36	22.31	5.84
4	S Glenn	Eng	29	577	565	41	13.78	5.88
5	D Sharma	Ind	37	797	820	44	18.64	6.17
6	A Athapaththu	SL	43	745	778	37	21.03	6.27
7	T Kanwar	Ind	12	270	283	11	25.73	6.29
8	S Bates	Aus	14	312	330	5	66.00	6.35
9	L Cheatle	Aus	21	443	473	28	16.89	6.41
10	K Garth	Aus	24	507	548	17	32.24	6.49
11	M Schutt	Aus	26	564	612	30	20.40	6.51
12	A Sutherland	Aus	37	717	780	40	19.50	6.53
13	S Ecclestone	Eng	28	612	668	40	16.70	6.55
14	S Molineux	Aus	13	300	328	18	18.22	6.56
15	L Smith	Eng	22	470	516	28	18.43	6.59
16	J Barsby	Aus	12	168	186	7	26.57	6.64
17	C Tryon	SA	34	571	634	28	22.64	6.66
18	R Yadav	Ind	22	438	488	32	15.25	6.68
19	L Filer	Eng	13	247	276	10	27.60	6.70
20	A Edgar	Aus	15	286	322	20	16.10	6.76

The depth of Australian cricket illustrated here, with 5 bowlers here who didn’t make the squad, in addition to 4 who did. Again England come in second with 4 bowlers.

Best Average

		Nat	Inns	Balls	Runs	Wkts	AVG	ER
1	S Day	Aus	14	294	337	27	12.48	6.88
2	E Perry	Aus	26	365	419	31	13.52	6.89
3	S Glenn	Eng	29	577	565	41	13.78	5.88
4	A Wellington	Aus	29	563	546	38	14.37	5.82
5	R Yadav	Ind	22	438	488	32	15.25	6.68
6	S Patil	Ind	20	381	457	29	15.76	7.20
7	A Edgar	Aus	15	286	322	20	16.10	6.76
8	H Darlington	Aus	13	264	365	22	16.59	8.30
9	A Sobhana	Ind	13	222	267	16	16.69	7.22
10	S Ecclestone	Eng	28	612	668	40	16.70	6.55
11	L Cheatle	Aus	21	443	473	28	16.89	6.41
12	S Ismail	SA	29	640	619	35	17.69	5.80
13	S Molineux	Aus	13	300	328	18	18.22	6.56
14	L Smith	Eng	22	470	516	28	18.43	6.59
15	D Sharma	Ind	37	797	820	44	18.64	6.17
16	J Jonassen	Aus	38	780	970	52	18.65	7.46
17	L Bell	Eng	21	416	500	26	19.23	7.21
18	S Ishaque	Ind	12	210	270	14	19.29	7.71
19	N Hancock	Aus	17	373	446	23	19.39	7.17
20	A Sutherland	Aus	37	717	780	40	19.50	6.53

A bit of a theme developing as Australia dominate once more with 10 representatives, 7 of whom don’t make the squad. Averaging under 20 makes you a very useful bowler whatever your economy rate, but only Darlington and Ishaque went at over 7.5 an over.

The elite performers, appearing in both lists, Shabnim Ismail, Amanda Wellington, Sarah Glenn, Deepti Sharma, Lauren Cheatle, Annabel Sutherland, Sophie Ecclestone, Sophie Molineux, Linsey Smith, Radha Yadav and Amy Edgar.

Despite battling a bleeding hand, Orla Prendergast took two wickets and then hit a wonderful 80 off 51 balls to give England a big black eye in the final match of their tour of Ireland – the hosts winning with 1 ball to spare at Clontarf Cricket Club in Dublin.

England 169-8 v Ireland 170-5 #IREvENG

— CRICKETher (@crickether.bsky.social) 2024-09-15T16:47:05.805Z

Having initially cut her hand playing for the Blaze in the RHF Trophy in England earlier in the month, the wound has literally been a running sore for Prendergast all week, and today it opened up again while she was fielding. With blood pouring out of her palm, the umpires insisted that she received treatment, and there was a lengthy delay whilst the medical staff patched her up before she was able to resume bowling.

To then come out and bat the best part of 20 overs showed her fighting spirit; to win the game for Ireland showed her class as a cricketer. Prendergast hit 13 fours, the majority through extra cover and mid off, manipulating the field as she went.

England 169-8 v Ireland 170-5 #IREvENG

— CRICKETher (@crickether.bsky.social) 2024-09-15T16:48:04.384Z

The key to Ireland’s victory was the 17th over – the biggest of the game – bowled by Charis Pavely. Going into the over, Ireland needed an increasing unlikely sounding 42 from 24 balls. After hitting a 4 off the second ball, Leah Paul turned the strike over to Prendergast with a single, and Prendergast stepped up to strike the last 3 balls of the over for boundaries. The first of those deliveries was a gimmie from Pavely – too short and too wide; but the second was only turned into a half-volley by brilliant footwork from Prendergast; and the third was just a very clean strike down the ground. Suddenly the ask was a much more realistic sounding 25 from 18, and the game was afoot.

Ireland didn’t make it easy for themselves though – keeping the fans watching on free-to-air TV on the edge of their sofas, Prendergast was bowled trying to cut a yorker from Kate Cross, leaving it once again a contest between Mady Villiers bowling the final over for England, and Ireland’s tail, just as it had been in Belfast when Ireland won the 3rd ODI.

Villiers stepped up, just as she had done earlier in the week, by applying the KISS principle – Keep It Simple, Stupid! Targeting the stumps, keeping her head as both Sarah Forbes and Ava Canning tried to charge her, she had them both bowled, leaving Ireland still needing 2 off 2, with the new batter – Christina Coulter-Reilly – at the crease.

Coulter-Reilly pulled the penultimate delivery straight back to Villiers with no power in the shot, and then set off for the single, having presumably been instructed to “Just Run”. Then, in echoes of the conclusion of the Sunrisers game at Chelmsford in 2022, which finished in a win for Western Storm after a wild overthrow from Villiers went for 4 off the final ball, Villiers hurled the ball at the stumps – it missed, there was no one backing up close enough to cut it off, and the crowd roared a roar far in excess of their actual number (a few hundred) to urge the batters to turn back for the second run and win the match.

Despite her frustrations, thumping the ground in disappointment, Villiers probably did the right thing – England needed the wicket if they wanted to win the game; and besides, England were only still in it thanks to the two wickets she had taken in the two previous deliveries. That’s the bit England should take note of, and as I wrote yesterday, Villiers should still have an England future based on her performances this tour.

For a couple of others, it looks likely that this was their final game for England. Paige Scholfield finished the tour on which she made her debut on a little high, with her highest score for her country – 34 off 21 balls – and if she finishes her career with just those 5 England caps, it is still 5 more caps than I (or most other people) ever got – she should be proud. Ditto Georgia Adams, who looked more settled today, making 23 off 15, as she made her second (and again presumably, final) appearance in an England shirt.

I continue to think that Seren Smale has more caps in front of her than anyone else on this tour, but she had an error-strewn day behind the stumps which made us once again realise how much we’ll miss Amy Jones when she hangs up her gloves. For almost 20 years, England have gone into most matches with the best wicketkeeper in the world – first Sarah Taylor, then Jones. Whether her successor is Smale or Bess Heath, or Ann Nicola Other, they just aren’t going to be that, at least at first, and we’re all going to have to get used to it!

But we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that a tough defeat to take for England was a glorious moment for Ireland, and I genuinely think their players reacted with more joy to the win than Australia’s did when they won the last T20 World Cup! They’ve taken a couple of beatings recently – from Scotland in the T20 World Cup qualifier (denying them a spot on the plane to the UAE), and from England in the 2nd ODI and yesterday’s T20; but they have bounced back bravely, come out fighting, and come out winners again today. As I write this, I can still hear whoops of celebration coming from the nearby pavilion bar at Clontarf Cricket Club. They are thoroughly deserved.

This week:

• Ireland’s famous win
• Have Bryony Smith & Seren Smale earned call-ups to the main England squad?
• Vipers out of the RHF: has Charlotte Edwards lost her touch?
• Our views on the 2025 English schedule

England squished Ireland in the first of two T20s at Clontarf Cricket Club in Dublin, winning by 67 runs as they bowled Ireland out for 109, having earlier posted 176.

Ireland v England at Clontarf

— CRICKETher (@crickether.bsky.social) 2024-09-14T14:53:45.271Z

The day began with another lengthy cap ceremony, including a debut for 30-year-old Georgia Adams. Exactly 4 years ago, after Adams had scored a record 154 in a match for Southern Vipers v Western Storm, I wrote the following:

Georgia “Gads” Adams’ 154 not out for the Vipers yesterday against the Storm, was one of the great innings in the history of domestic women’s cricket. It was the highest score ever made in top-level domestic cricket in England by an uncapped player, and although it is not beyond the realms of possibility that Gads will go on to play for England, she’ll be 27 next month, so it does look as though her appearances for England Academy will be as close as she’ll come to wearing an England shirt.

Not for the first time… and surely not for the last… I was wrong!

Adams’ appearance today therefore marked the end of a long journey, from coming up through Sussex where her father Chris had become something of a legend, through a stint at Lightning in the KSL days, then on to Vipers, winning 3 RHF Trophies and 2 Charlotte Edwards Cups as captain in the regional era. She won’t be adding a 6th regional trophy to that list – whilst she was out on the field for England, Vipers were losing their RHF Trophy semi-final to South East Stars – but she has now at last got the England cap that was the one thing missing from her CV.

The other debutantes were Paige Scholfield, who of course had made her ODI debut last weekend in Belfast, and Charis Pavely and Seren Smale, playing their first games for England, having both represented England U19s in the U19 World Cup in South Africa just last year.

Both had decent outings, indicating promising futures ahead of them. Bess Heath is fortunate that England’s squad for the World Cup was effectively picked months ago, because on form right now, I’d take Smale over Heath as a keeper-batter backup for Amy Jones. Smale made 25 off 19 balls, and kept tidily; whilst Pavely took 3-19 – albeit with some fortune in the case of the wicket of Rebecca Stokell, who would surely have been reprieved on review if DRS had been available – given out caught behind, but with replays showing clear daylight between bat and ball as it went past the edge.

But the star of the day was Bryony Smith, who got England off to a massive start with a 24-ball 50 – the (joint) 14th fastest of all time. Smith admitted afterwards that she had been disappointed not to get a game in the ODI series, as England persisted with a woefully out-of-nick Emma Lamb. But handed her opportunity today, Smith came out with all guns blazing. There are players who hit the ball sweeter, but there are few who hit it harder, and when she comes off like she did today, she can take the game away from you in a heartbeat.

England 176 v Ireland #IREvENG

— CRICKETher (@crickether.bsky.social) 2024-09-14T15:04:30.527Z

Tammy Beaumont was largely a spectator through the powerplay – Beaumont was on 8 as Smith passed 50 in the 6th over – as England set off at more than 10 an over, probably putting the game beyond Ireland within half an hour of the start. Smith did get badly dropped by Gaby Lewis on the ring, and a better fielding team might have cut off some of the drives down the ground; but Ireland were not that team, and Smith punished them for it over and over, to the tune of 12 fours. Inevitably, she was eventually caught at cow corner, but she’d done the job she came here to do, and surely sent notice to England that should a gap open up at the top of the order, her hat is in the ring.

At one stage, it looked like England were on for a really big score; but a poor Late Middle phase held them back, as they lost wickets, and were eventually bowled out off the final ball. Despite her heroics of 4 years ago, Georgia Adams is more of a bowler who bats a bit these days, and she looked slightly off the pace with the bat, not only compared to Smith, but also to Smale and Mady Villiers, who has had a decent last couple of games on this tour.

Villiers contributed 35 off 15 to get England back on track towards the death; and later took 1-9 with the ball. She would probably need to make another step up with her batting if she’s ever to become an England regular, but the role she ends up occupying could perhaps be the one Georgia Elwiss occupied for years – that of specialist travelling reserve, especially given that she remains one of the best fielders in the world, so would be a useful player to have on the bench for fielding sub duties.

England 176 v Ireland 109 #IREvENG

— CRICKETher (@crickether.bsky.social) 2024-09-14T16:28:03.421Z

Ireland have never chased anything like 176 in a T20 – their best effort being 152 v Bangladesh in 2018 – so the result felt like a foregone conclusion, and so it proved with only Orla Prendergast (52) and Ava Canning (25) reaching double-figures. Prendergast really does look a cut above everyone else, and is perhaps the most talented player Ireland have produced since… well… since anyone – she’s Kim Garth with batting, and if she can carry this form into WBBL then the world is her oyster. At 22, she could still go down the route Garth took, and try to qualify for Australia or England; but with Ireland now a fixture in the ICC Championship, it would mean missing out on Ireland opportunities that Garth just wasn’t getting when she was pondering that move 7-or-8 years ago, and I’m not convinced she needs to in order to have a fulfilling career, so I hope she sticks with Ireland.

Good as she is though, she can’t do it all herself, and with little support, Ireland subsided to 109 all out. England were efficient rather than brilliant with the ball. Wong did bowl a lovely wobble-seamer which moved a mile off the pitch to dismiss Gaby Lewis; but Laurens Bell and Filer won’t be having sleepless nights over her performance, or that of Mahika Gaur, who looked fine, but might have been better coming back into domestic cricket rather than the heat of a full international, having (I think) slightly tweaked her action whilst she’s been away.

With the game being shown live on free-to-air TV, on the Irish equivalent of Channel 4, it was important for the game as a whole that Ireland acquitted themselves well, and they didn’t entirely do that, but they didn’t totally embarrass themselves either. A slightly better day at the office tomorrow would be good though, as we return to Clontarf for the final match of this tour.

When is an ODI not an ODI? When it’s part of the 2001 Women’s European Championship, that’s when! England sent what they then considered to be an “A” side to that competition, and have always refused to recognise the matches as official ODIs. The ICC however does consider them to be full ODIs, including Ireland’s 56 run victory over England at Reading. So depending on which you believe (and… honestly… we go with the ICC on this one) this is either the first or second time Ireland have beaten England in an ODI.

England 153 v Ireland 155-7 (T: 155) #IREvENG

— CRICKETher (@crickether.bsky.social) 2024-09-11T17:53:35.651Z

Through sunshine and rain, and at one stage both at the same time, Ireland stuck in there to better England off the final delivery, when a fielding error on the boundary by Hollie Armitage allowed the ball to trickle over the rope with 4 required. Armitage looked like she wanted the ground to swallow her up, but no one player loses a game by themselves. The error behind the stumps by Bess Heath which had conceded 3 byes in the 20th over was equally critical; but the same applies – it was England who weren’t quite good enough on the day, not Armitage or Heath.

With half the day lost to the weather, it was past 3 in the afternoon when the players finally took to the field to play a 25 overs per side game – soon reduced to 22 overs after a further break for rain, making it more a slightly elongated T20 than a shortened ODI. This undoubtedly played into Ireland’s strengths; but England would still have been firm favorites, even after getting bowled out with 7 balls remaining.

England 153 v Ireland 155-7 (T: 155) #IREvENG

— CRICKETher (@crickether.bsky.social) 2024-09-11T17:54:01.645Z

Despite losing 8 wickets in the second half of their innings, England still managed to go at a decent clip – maintaining a run rate in excess of 6 an over to get them to 153, to which one run was added by DLS as a result of the reduction in overs during England’s innings. In T20 terms, that’s about 139 – not a huge score, but by no means a poor one either. (A typical 1st innings score in a T20 between the ICC Championship sides is 138.) England yet again had Tammy Beaumont to thank for the bulk of their runs, adding another 50 to the 150 she made in the 2nd ODI, to finish the rubber with 212 runs and a Player of the Series medal.

With an ask of 7 an over, there was only one way for Ireland to play if they were going to win the game – go on the attack, which stand-in captain Gaby Lewis did with aplomb. Kate Cross had taken Ireland to pieces in the first game, but Lewis was able to put that out of her mind and go on the attack in Cross’s first over, striking her for two 4s, which set the tone for an innings of 72 off 56 balls. If she’d stayed in, Ireland would have won easily, but Bess Heath held onto an edge off Lauren Filer, and with 137 on the board and 18 still required, Lewis was going to have to watch the rest of the game from the boundary like any other spectator.

The ask was less than a run a ball, but not a lot less – 18 off 22 – so Ireland needed to maintain their impetus to take it to the final over with 8 required. Kate Cross could have bowled it, but she handed the ball to Mady Villiers, who did not let her down, helping to complete a run out, then taking two wickets by keeping it simple and bowling at the stumps, leaving Ireland’s No. 9 Alana Dalzell to face the first and only delivery she’s received this year (!) in international cricket, needing 4 to win the game.

And the rest, as they say, is history.

A record 10th ODI hundred from Tammy Beaumont, pulling her clear of Nat Sciver-Brunt and Charlotte Edwards at the head of the all-time list of England centurions, drove England to a massive 320 as they crushed Ireland in the 2nd ODI in Belfast.

England 320-8 v Ireland #IREvENG

— CRICKETher (@crickether.bsky.social) 2024-09-09T13:04:48.660Z

Beaumont carried her bat for 150 not out – the second highest ODI score of her career – hitting the last 50 of those runs at a Strike Rate of over 200, as England piled on the pain in the last 10 overs, which went for 99.

England 320-8 v Ireland #IREvENG

— CRICKETher (@crickether.bsky.social) 2024-09-09T13:05:12.932Z

By the 10 over mark in Ireland’s reply they had collapsed to 24-6 – the DLS par score at that stage, a whopping 221, with the only remaining doubt being whether we’d make it to the requisite 20 overs to constitute a game. At one point with about 8 overs bowled, the skies blackened and there was a scurry to rescue laptops and notepads from the front row of the press gazebo as a flurry of rain blew in; but in the end it was academic: Ireland beat the rain, bowled out within 17 overs for 45 – their lowest ever total in ODIs.

Other open question at 10 overs: would today’s debutante, Georgia Davis, even get a bowl, given how fast the game was slipping away from Ireland? But she did get her hands on the ball, and did take her first wicket, bowling Alice Tector, to whoops and cheers from the posse of Sparks players, led by Abbey Freeborn, who had made the trip over to Belfast to support her. The grin on her face as she made her way back to fine leg in front of her mates at the end of that over, was perhaps the most delightful thing I saw all day – Irish eyes might not have been smiling, but Davis ones were!

Davis then added the final wicket to her haul to finish with 2-19, with Freya Kemp also taking a brace, though the latter looked far from convincing with the ball. Kemp did however blast a rapid 65 off 47 balls with the bat – a welcome return to form after a dismal Hundred averaging just 7 at a Strike Rate of 89. She did have one enormous slice of luck today – if there had been umpire reviews, she would almost certainly have been run out early-doors; and her batting remains a tad one-dimensional. Her big shot is the slog-sweep over midwicket, which bought her half her boundary runs today – and you’d think an Australia or an India would bowl better lines to her to cut off that option, or at least put a fielder out there on the midwicket boundary. But you can only play the balls you are bowled, and Kemp was entitled to take full advantage as she did.

Another player who looked better than she has done recently was Lauren Filer, who bowled with the aggression of a woman with a point to prove after being left out of the World Cup squad. She was a little bit all-over-the-place in the first ODI on Saturday, but today she found some extra nip in what were definitely “nippy” conditions, and the Irish batters looked terrified. Filer finished with 3 wickets, but it could easily have been 5 or 6, and if she can work out how to bottle-up the way she bowled today and bring it to every game, there will be more World Cups in the future for sure.

Despite the record bowling performance though, the day belonged to Tammy Beaumont. The first time I saw her play an innings which offered a hint of what was to come was a battling innings for Kent, opening the batting with Charlotte Edwards, whose 9 ODI hundreds Beaumont pulled clear over today. Her trademark shot back then was a punched drive down the ground through mid off; but of today’s 150 runs, not a single one came in that area – instead it was the pulls through midwicket that she worked hardest, as well as running hard between the sticks, putting the teenagers on the field to shame with her pace over 22 yards.

What was the same as that early innings for Kent was the ability to dig in and fight – it wasn’t easy going early on, and she didn’t really find a groove until those final few overs; but it shows real temperament to not force the runs when they aren’t quite coming, and then to explode into life when they are. In the fifteenth year of her international career, having batted at almost every position in the lineup (in her ODI debut, she came in at 10!), Tammy Beaumont has seen it all. But more importantly, she has now done it all – she’ll be remembered as one of the greats, and we’ll miss her when she goes.

Six wickets and a cool, calm 38 not out from Kate Cross was enough for England to secure victory against Ireland in the 1st ODI at Stormont in Belfast.

#IREvENG Ireland 210 v England 211-6

— CRICKETher (@crickether.bsky.social) 2024-09-07T15:36:06.733Z

On what locals told us was the finest day of the summer in Northern Ireland, the Irish (whose team comprises members from both Northern Ireland (part of the UK) and the Republic of Ireland) opted to bat first having won the toss, and would probably have settled for anything over 200, which is where the threshold of respectability lies in ICC Championship cricket right now – a “typical” 1st innings score being between 200 and 300, with 250 the average in recent years.

#IREvENG Ireland 210 v England

— CRICKETher (@crickether.bsky.social) 2024-09-07T12:55:28.928Z

England got the early breakthrough, with Kate Cross going up twice for LBW to Una Raymond-Hoey in the opening over, and getting the decision at the second time of asking; and Ireland also lost Gaby Lewis in the powerplay – dismissed by the perfect Lauren Filer delivery, bouncing into the rib-cage of Lewis, who could couldn’t get her glove out of the way in time, sending a catch lolliping up to Hollie Armitage at slip.

This brought local girl Amy Hunter (born in Belfast) and Orla Prendergast (last seen playing for The Blaze in regionals) together, who put on 53 to steady the ship as England struggled to drive home any advantage those early wickets might have given them. That’s not to say that Hunter and Prendergast quite got away from England, but both were able to milk relatively easy runs from Hannah Baker and Ryana MacDonald-Gay, and if it hadn’t been for a lapse in concentration from Hunter right after the drinks break at 16 overs, the two might have done a lot more damage.

Prendergast showed her worth to this Ireland team, continuing to push on with Leah Paul, including hitting the only 6 of the innings, before eventually holing-out off Kate Cross in the 31st over for a well-made 76 off 87 balls. It was a rapid ride downhill for Ireland from there, as they slipped from 151-3 to 210 all out as Kate Cross completed her 6fer, meaning ultimately that they left the field disappointed, with a total they would probably have taken at the start of the day.

With 5 debutantes in their lineup, including 3 making their first appearances for England – Baker, MacDonald-Gay and Paige Scholfield – there was definitely potential for England to collapse in a bundle of nerves, especially if they lost a couple of early wickets. With Emma Lamb having departed early, England could have done with Tammy Beaumont sticking around but she got an unplayable delivery from Prendergast – very likely the Ball of the Series, it nipped in at pace between bat and pad to take the very top off the off bail – a delivery that would have dismissed Meg Lanning in her prime.

It was left to two of those debutantes – Scholfield and Hollie Armitage – to get England back on track, under a fair bit of pressure with  only 32 on the board, but whilst both might be debutantes, neither are dilettantes, and at 28 and 27 respectively both have years of professional cricket behind them. That experience showed, as they worked the field in a 62 run partnership that tested the captaincy of Gaby Lewis, who found herself chasing the gaps – plugging one, only for Scholfield and Armitage to find another.

Neither Scholfield (31) nor Armitage (44) were able to push on quite as far as they no doubt would have liked, but their partnership of 62 ensured that England had the platform they needed to go on and win the game.

England definitely had the edge at the half-way point in their innings, but it wasn’t a done deal, with WinHer giving Ireland still a 24% chance at that stage.

#IREvENG Ireland 210 v England 146-5

— CRICKETher (@crickether.bsky.social) 2024-09-07T14:57:37.846Z

It took the most experienced player in the side – the captain Kate Cross, selected for this role very much because England wanted someone who could be a calm head in a crisis, to come in at 8 and get England over the line. If Hollie Armo was Bob The Builder, and Scholfield, Freya Kamp and Bess Heath were Scoop, Muck and Dizzy; then Cross was Wendy – turning up in the final act to do what needed to be done and finish the job!

Cross was understandably delighted at the end, basking in the glow of a Player of the Match award in her first game as captain (something which Heather Knight also achieved, back in 2016 against Pakistan), but Ireland will retain some hope that they can take something from this series against an England team that were definitely a step below the usual 1st XI. Ireland have some decent players in the likes of Prendergast and Hunter, who look capable of winning a match on their day; but it will definitely take “their day”, with Ireland’s fielding in particular looking amateurish compared to England’s, leaking runs they could ill-afford to as England closed in on their total. If Ireland can keep heart, it looks set to be an interesting next 10 days on the Emerald Isle.

By Andy Frombolton

Let’s start by looking at some data from The Hundred and the Charlotte Edwards Cup.

First, The Hundred …

	PLACE	PLAYERS USED	PLAYERS PLAYING ALL GAMES	ALL ROUNDERS	LOW IMPACT PLAYERS
Spirit	1	13	9	3	3
Fire	2	12	9	3	4
Invincibles	3	12	10	1	3
Superchargers	4	12	10	1	5
Rockets	5	12	10	3	5
Originals	6	13	8	2	7
Phoenix	7	13	7	2	4
Brave	8	13	9	0	3

All-rounders: 100+ runs plus 5+ wickets or wicket-keepers scoring 100+ runs. A ‘low-impact’ player took <5 wickets (i.e. wasn’t primarily a bowler) and scored <50 runs (i.e. did not contribute significantly with the bat.

Sticking with the same team is obviously fine if you’re winning, but 3 teams (Originals, Superchargers and Phoenix) won only 3 games and SB won just 1. It’s thus extremely telling about the deemed quality of the possible replacements that the coaches stuck with so many under-performing players in these circumstances.

The Hundred is promoted as the premier short-form competition and one might expect international players to dominate the batting and bowling tables. As this article will show, this was certainly true of the women’s competition, but far less so in the men’s Hundred (16 of the top 20 run scorers were English, 6 of whom were ‘uncapped’ [at international level] and 11 of the top 20 wicket-takers were English, 2 of whom were uncapped).

The Aussies are rightly renowned for their endless stable of all-rounders; producing 7 of the 15 all-rounders – compared to just 3 English players (Gibson, Sciver-Brunt and A. Jones).

Similarly, only 6 of the top 20 run scorers were English and only 1 (Schofield) is uncapped. (Next on the list were Scrivens #21 and Griffiths #33). As noted in my previous article, despite all the investment the English system is totally failing to develop significant numbers of new batters.

Similarly, of the 12 bowlers taking 10+ wickets only 5 were English and just 3 (Davis, Arlott and Levick) were uncapped. Moving down the wicket-taking table, 19 bowlers took between 5-9 wickets with slightly better representation at this level from domestic uncapaped players (Gray, Pavely, McDonald-Gay and Corteen-Coleman).

Only 4 keepers scored more than 100 runs (3 non-English players: Redmayne; Mooney; and Bryce; plus Jones). (More on keepers who can’t bat in the next section.)

Finally, 34 out of 100 players were ‘low impact’. A good argument can be made that for some younger players mere participation is a valuable learning experience and it’s true that when teams are packed with International players and an innings lasts just 100 balls many players will have limited opportunities to make an impression. Nevertheless, this still seems a very high proportion.

In summary, the tournament was dominated by international players (with non-English international players very much in the ascendancy) and very few uncapped players made a credible case for higher honours. Most worryingly, squad depth – as illustrated by squad deployment – is extremely thin.

Turning to the CEC …

	PLACE	PLAYERS	PLAYERS PLAYING 9+ GAMES	ALL ROUNDERS	LOW IMPACT
Blaze	1	14	9	2	2
Stars	2	16	7	1	3
Vipers	3	17	7	3	3
Sparks	4	15	10	1	2
Thunder	5	19	5	1	8
Diamonds	6	15	9	3	2
Storm	7	16	5	1	4
Sunrisers	8	14	8	1	5

All-rounders: 100+ runs and 7+ wickets or keepers with 100+ runs. The criteria for low impact players is far less onerous than for The Hundred: 0-1 wickets and <60 runs.

With only a sprinkling of overseas players and limited appearances by England players, the CEC provides a platform for domestic players to shine.

Most of the small number of international players participating did well; the Aussies providing 4 of the 11 all-rounders. A further 3 of the all-rounders were keepers, starkly highlighting the domestic system’s failure to produce batting/bowling all-rounders.

Another phenomenon is the continuing existence of keepers who can’t bat. Even allowing for the higher prevalence of slow bowling in the women’s game (which arguably means superior keeping skills can compensate for weaker batting) it seems an untenable anachronism that there were 4 keepers who averaged less than 8.5 with the bat. (NB Any good upcoming young batters with ‘good hands’ would be well advised to consider becoming a batter-keeper to maximise their prospects.)

But what’s been apparent for several years is the uneven spread of talent across the 8 teams. Take the bottom 4 teams …

Thunder’s team composition was very volatile which partly explains the high number of low impact players (more players playing a small number of games). But they had just 1(!) bowler with more than 7 wickets (F. Morris with 9). And whilst they do have several players capable of chipping in with wickets – unfortunately none displayed much batting prowess. With only 3 players scoring more than 100 runs (plus one other scoring 75 runs), Thunder’s tail effectively starts at 5. By any metric this is a weak team – but, notwithstanding this lack of batting and bowling strength, there were 3 teams beneath them!

Northern Diamonds tends to do better in the longer game – although they were CEC runners up in 2021. The younger generation has been brought up on T20, but only 2 domestic batters with 60+ runs (Heath and Armitage) had a SR of 100+. Heath was denied the gloves on occasions and unless she improves rapidly, I predict she risks being usurped as England keeper-in-waiting by Bryce switching her allegiance post the world cup. The bowling attack is skilled, but shallow, and Slater stands out as the best emerging talent.

Western Storm have long struggled to develop or attract talent to the south-west (which may not bode well for Somerset’s Tier 1 recruitment prospects). Knight scored most runs (155) in just 3 games which tells its own story (all other teams had at least 2 batters with more runs than this – and Sparks had 5) although one bright spot was Corney. However, of batters scoring 60+ runs, only Knight and Wellington had a SR of 100+. Only 3 bowlers took 7+ wickets; Smale being the domestic success. And Storm’s decision to play Wong and Anderson (neither of whom could get a game for their employer, Sparks) over their local talent reflects a lack of viable options.

And finally, Sunrisers. Sunrisers utilised the smallest number of players and surprisingly had 5 batters with 100+ runs; although their top 2 run scorers (Gardner and Scrivens) had SRs of 108 making it hard to post imposing targets. The resurgent Villiers, Gray and Munro were the only bowlers to take more than 7 wickets, although only Munro’s SR suggested a degree of penetration.

But here’s the most worrying statistic: 30 of the 126 players who made an appearance met the (unchallenging) criteria for low impact players. Whilst injuries and limited appearances partly explain this number 18 of this 30 are currently-contracted players.

Quite simply, the current talent pool isn’t deep enough to meet the current requirement for professional players, yet Project Darwin will see each of the 8 Tier 1 teams recruit 15 players (in addition to which Yorkshire is apparently assembling a team in preparation for becoming Tier 1 in 2026).

Put another way, that’s over 50 more contracted professionals.

For women’s cricket to grow standards in Tier 1 need to be uniformly high – both to prove the sceptics wrong but, more importantly, to ensure that the first impressions of those coming to the game will be positive (since a few disappointing experiences would be hard to subsequently change). A rational ECB realising this and looking at the data should have decided to start with 6 Tier 1 counties and specified the conditions (spectator/viewer numbers, broadcast/sponsorship revenues, etc.) which would need to be met before Tier 1 was expanded without pre-determining what the end state (timescales and number of Tier 1 teams) must be.

A successor article will illustrate why prioritising optics and selective narratives and mandating how many and which clubs will ascend to Tier 1 (and by when) is both sub-optimal and risks doing significant harm to the women’s game.

This week:

• NZ & England’s contrasting approaches to captaincy succession planning
• World Cup squads: Australia go pace-heavy, England put their trust in spin
• Why did Grace Scrivens & Kirstie Gordon miss out on Ireland selection?
• Chaos in the RHF as regions become counties
• What should Jay Shah do in his first 6 months in office?