Sophia Dunkley produced the most significant performance of her England career, soaking up the pressure after coming in at 96-4 to deliver 67 critical runs and put the match well beyond Bangladesh’s limited batting.

England then bowled Bangladesh out for 134 to win by exactly 100 runs, bumping their Net Run Rate up sufficiently to ensure that whatever happened in the other match between South Africa and India, England finished the group stages in 3rd place, avoiding Australia and setting up a repeat of their 2017 semi-final against South Africa.

Batting at the bottom of the middle-order is so often the hardest gig in the game. If you come in at all, it is either with only a few overs left with no chance to “build” an innings, or with your team in horrendous trouble, knowing you have to guard your wicket all the more carefully as you try to shepherd the tail.

Put like that, it is actually quite odd that it’s a job England seem to invariably give to their most junior batter, but it is what they seem to do. (And no doubt will do to Alice Capsey if she comes into the T20 team next summer… though they shouldn’t!)

“Junior” is relative of course – Dunkley has over 40 caps now, across all 3 formats, so she’s no newbie, and she’s been consistent in this World Cup – she’s got starts every time she’s come to the crease, but hasn’t been able to convert that into a bigger score until today.

The impression I have is that, for whatever reasons, Dunkley has been limiting her game when pulling on an England shirt in this format. It is really interesting that the commentators working on this World Cup have never seen Dunkley play domestic 50-over cricket, so they see her primarily as a paddle-sweeper.

But when we looked back at Raf’s notes from one of her big innings for Stars a couple of years ago (her 90-odd at Beckenham v Sunrisers), it was full of cuts and pulls and drives; and though she started sweeping here, as she grew in confidence the drives started to come out of the box, and they were coming out of the middle of the bat too.

That’s the Sophia Dunkley England need going forwards; and it was the reason England were in a position to finish strongly today.

If they were realistic, Bangladesh’s aim at this World Cup would have been to win a game and hopefully not finish last. They’ve done that, and they should be proud of what they’ve achieved. They are a good bowling side, but their batting is still stuck in the amateur era and it was quickly apparent that they weren’t going to chase 234 – England had the game won at the break, and it was just a question of whether England could take the wickets quickly enough to get the Net Run Rate advantage they’d need to avoid Australia if India beat South Africa.

England’s pace attack has been blunted this World Cup and they’ve struggled to take wickets, while continuing to believe they’ve got the selections right. Freya Davies came in today, but it was made clear that Anya Shrubsole was only being rested, and Davies’ place in the pecking order was established as Nat Sciver opened with Katherine Brunt.

But neither Brunt not Sciver could make the breakthrough, and nor could Kate Cross, with Davies finally being thrown the ball in the 24th over. Davies ended up bowling 10 overs after Brunt went off with a “tight back”, and taking 2-36 – a tidy performance in a spinner’s game (Ecclestone, Dean and Knight taking 7 of the 9 wickets to fall to bowlers), but probably not one that is going to stop Shrubsole coming back for the semi-final.

Because a semi-final is where England are now headed, to play South Africa who handed them one of the 3 losses they started off this tournament with. Do they deserve to be in the semis? The way things have turned out (at time of writing this sentence, South Africa have literally just hit the winning run off the last ball against India) is tough on India; but frankly it is West Indies who have lucked out with that crucial point from a washed-out match they would probably have lost against South Africa. England put themselves in a position where they effectively faced down 4 quarter-finals in a row, and they fought through them tooth-and-nail and came out the other side. It wasn’t pretty, but ultimately it was pretty effective. The table doesn’t lie – they pulled it off, and they deserve it.

“Full Coverage” it said, in large friendly letters, when I logged on to Sky’s YouTube channel at 1am this morning UK time. Although Sky have exclusive rights to this World Cup, the pay TV behemoth had promised that all England’s matches would be streamed free on via YouTube. What nice chaps! And so positive about women’s sport!

Except… someone, somewhere presumably forgot to push the button and fans were left “Waiting for Sky Sports Cricket” until the cows came home, 4½ hours later*.

Sky are a business, and I’d totally understand if they’d decided to keep the whole tournament behind a paywall; but to say you’ll show it free… and lap up the kudos for being oh-so supportive of women’s sport… and then not show it, is really poor form. The ICC should take these things into account when awarding the contracts next time. But they won’t. Because… money!

Anyways…

While I was watching a blank screen on YouTube, England were having fun down-under in New Zealand, winning by enough to take them into 4th place on Net Run Rate. If they can avoid defeat to Bangladesh in their final match, they will qualify for the semi-finals. Not only that, but their NRR gain today could help them avoid a semi-final with Australia, with the exact-same semi-finals as last time (England v South Africa & Australia v India) potentially on the cards.

Katherine Brunt and Danni Wyatt chose today to find the form that has been eluding them since their arrival in Aotearoa, Brunt taking 3-17 and Wyatt smacking 76 off 68 balls; and England won a game easily for the first time at this tournament, which wasn’t a given, having nearly stuffed-up an equally straightforward chase against India.

It feels like England’s management have gone all-in on Brunt this tournament, selecting her today despite her having taken just 1 wicket in 5 games, while dropping Charlie Dean (7 wickets) to bring in an extra batter. It’s hard to tell from the social media clips that are all I’ve seen, but the consensus seems to be that she was much improved today – more disciplined and less banging it in short like it’s still the glory days of 2005. There are ways to play this game into your late 30s, but trying to pretend you are still 20 ain’t one of them! Was this the day Katherine Brunt finally realised that?

Will England make any changes now for the final match v Bangladesh at the weekend? The logic of playing Lamb today was that England wanted to win quickly, and they’ll want to do the same again, to put some clear blue water between themselves and India in terms of Net Run Rate, and hopefully avoid Australia in the semis, so you can see them going with an unchanged batting line-up. As for the bowling, the temptation to rest people (Brunt in particular) will have to be weighed against the importance continuing the momentum they’ve built up here (again… Brunt in particular). My guess is that “England unchanged” will be the words we’ll be reading when we see the team on Saturday. And hopefully for England, the result will be unchanged too.

————–

* We had actually paid for Now TV, but various commitments meant we were in different cities for the night, and Raf had bagsies on the sub, because she was doing the Guardian. And yes – I could have paid for a last-minute upgrade to “multi-screen” but I felt like I was being bait-and-switched at that point, so… no!

One of the England players has found a 4-leaf clover – it’s the only explanation for where we are now. Because despite losing their first 3 games, and batting like a total sheep-show today, England now look a pretty good bet to make the semi-finals of the World Cup.

Providing England beat Pakistan and Bangladesh, there are 2187 ways the cards could fall in terms of other results. England qualify absolutely (without Net Run Rate) in 93% of those scenarios, and could qualify on NRR in all of the remaining 7%. If they end up needing NRR, it will be a bun-fight on 8 points with India and possibly also South Africa or West Indies.

But it gets even better for England.

(Here comes the Net Run Rate deets – you can skip the next paragraph if you want – there’s a “TLDR” after!)

South Africa currently have a lower NRR than England, and they have already got 8 points – so the only way the finish on 8 points is by losing all of their remaining three matches, which means that their NRR then would likely be even lower than it is now. And although West Indies (currently on 6 points, with 2 to play) could end up with 8 points and a NRR higher than England, their NRR is currently so bad that it would take an absolutely impossible victory in the match they won to overhaul England. (Even if they lost their losing game by 1 run and 1 ball (so basically no hit to NRR) if they scored 300, and then bowled their opposition out for 1 (yes – 1!) it still wouldn’t be enough to match England’s current NRR.)

TLDR: If it comes down to NRR, it all comes down to India as far as England are concerned – in practice, South Africa and West Indies don’t matter.

India currently have a slightly higher NRR than England, and would improve it a bit if they won both their remaining games (Bangladesh and South Africa) by 20/30 runs, so England need to win their matches (Bangladesh and Pakistan) by more than India do, plus around-about 40/50 runs extra. It’s feels pretty doable… and remember, that’s only in the 7% of chances where it comes down to NRR.

[Update: the previous paragraph originally said that India’s NRR would definitely improve if they won both their games, but (especially at the back-end of a tournament where you’ve had a couple of huge wins, as India have) that’s not true – thanks to The Clanger, in ‘Have Your Say’ below for pointing this out. I’ve now run the numbers, and they need to win both games by something of the order of 20/30 runs to maintain their NRR.]

We are here, of course, largely at the expense of New Zealand, who had a day as unlucky as England’s was lucky, losing both Sophie Devine and Lea Tahuhu to injuries that meant neither could bowl after Tahuhu limped off in the 17th over. England got to face the very occasional “off spin with a leg spin action” bowling of Brooke Halliday instead, and limped over the line with 1 wicket remaining. New Zealand can theoretically still qualify mathematically on NRR, but their chances are slimmer than a 60s supermodel – they are all-but out.

In the circumstances, I think we can say that this was England’s worst performance of the tournament – despite bowling New Zealand out for 203, and then the injuries, they almost ****** it up AGAIN having been 98-2 at one stage and cruising. Nat Sciver making runs, but not closing the deal is starting to become a rather worrying pattern – she left the tail still needing 17, and it very nearly proved beyond them, because… at the risk of stating the obvious here… in large, friendly letters:

THEY ARE A TAIL!

THEY SHOULDN’T BE HAVING TO DO THIS!

They did it though, and somehow England march on in this tournament. Despite having an opening “strike” bowler (Katherine Brunt) who has taken 1 wicket in the entire tournament; a walking wicket at the top of the batting order (played variously by Danni Wyatt and Lauren Winfield-Hill) meaning Heather Knight is effectively opening; and a middle-order that look like they couldn’t close a self-sealing envelope, they are now odds on to make the semis.

And you thought the Irish were lucky.

The positive way of looking at England’s World Cup is that they’ve suffered one real “defeat”, to the West Indies, and two losses to once-in-a-lifetime performances – Rachael Haynes 130, the highest score in her long career; and Marizanne Kapp’s 5-45, the best figures in her even longer career. They came into this tournament as the second-best side in the world, and one bad result wasn’t going to change that.

Nonetheless, they came into this match with their lives on the line, needing a win to stay realistically in the hunt for a semi-final spot. There was still a mathematical opportunity for them to qualify with just 3 wins, but the stars would have had to align perfectly in terms of other results going their way for them to do so. To put some numbers on it, if they’d lost they would have qualified in just 2% of the possible remaining scenarios where they won their remaining games; but having won, they now make the semi-finals in 83% of possible outcomes where they win their last 3 matches, though some of these are quite implausible (e.g. every other game being rained off).

All it took was three moments of magic in the first 10 overs to put them in a position to win this game.

MAGIC MOMENT 1: Anya Shrubsole has lost none of her ability to swing the ball over the years, but it was all becoming a bit samey. Opposing sides have much more access to analytics than they had even 5 years ago, and so batters have known exactly what to expect from her – the fast ball that swings in sharply, or the slower one… that swings in sharply. But to the left-handed Yastika Bhatia today, she got one to shape away and then come back in just enough to slip through Yastika’s defences and take out middle stump.

MAGIC MOMENT 2: Last summer in the RHF Trophy we watched Sophia Dunkley drop two sitters in two balls on the boundary at Beckenham against Vipers. And we just shrugged: that’s our Dunks! So when she appealed for a spectacular catch diving forwards at cover to dismiss Mithali Raj, the on-field officials were probably right to just double-check with the third umpire. But the TV replay showed no doubt – she’d grasped the opportunity literally with both hands.

MAGIC MOMENT 3: After losing two early wickets, the last thing India needed was someone trying to run a suicidal single; but that’s exactly what Deepti did, presumably thinking that she was safe going to Kate Cross’s weaker hand, to her left at mid off. But Cross angled her run perfectly to intersect with the ball on her right hand and hurl it in for a direct hit.

At 28-3 it was always going to be uphill for India from there, and they limped to 134 all out, giving England a fantastic opportunity to not only win the game but also massively boost their Net Run Rate.

And somehow they still nearly stuffed it up!

The loss of two early wickets wasn’t great, but… it happens. Nat Sciver and Heather Knight rebuilt and looked to be cruising, until Sciver lost her concentration for a moment, getting a top-edge off Vastrakar which ballooned up for Jhulan Goswami to take the catch. Amy Jones then came in, and immediately went into her shell – she was on 4 off 26 balls – a Strike Rate of 15 – when she finally decided to hit one, and for a moment the Amy Jones of domestic cricket was unleashed as she smashed Gayakwad back over her head for a huge maximum. But the Amy Jones of more recent international cricket returned two balls later, trying to play the same shot again, but barely clearing the circle to be well taken by Harmanpreet.

Enter Sophia Dunkley, looking sharp at the crease, but she couldn’t see it through either… and nor could Katherine Brunt, who lasted just 2 balls. It was left to Sophie Ecclestone to bring it home and hit the winning boundary in the 32nd over.

Nonetheless, a win is a win. Net Run Rate doesn’t care about wickets, luckily enough, and England’s NRR is remarkably now better than South Africa’s, even though South Africa have won 3 games and England lost 3.

So England are back in with a shout – they still need things to fall their way, but their chances are much better than they were 24 hours ago. As ex Head Coach Mark Robinson pointed out on the radio yesterday, if the results fall the way England hope, they can make the semis, and then we know they can win a one-off game against anyone, even Australia. It could still happen!

Capital punishment was abolished in New Zealand in 1989* but sadly for England’s cricketers, Kappital punishment continues to be very much legal… as Heather Knight and co. discovered to their cost last night.

Remarkably for someone who is arguably the finest bowler of her generation, Marizanne Kapp has never taken an international 5fer before, though she has taken 4 wickets 5 times – 4 times in ODIs, plus once in T20s. Her 5-45 at Mount Maunganui dismantled England, putting the defending champions in very real danger of not qualifying for the knockout stages, and leaving South Africa with a very strong chance of making the semis for the first time since… last time!

Although the vast majority of games in this tournament have been won by the side batting first – the only two that weren’t, prior to today, were against the “minnows”, Pakistan and Bangladesh – South Africa won the toss and opted to send England in, and it paid off quickly with the early wickets of Wyatt and Knight. Both were sucker-punched by Kapp: Wyatt chasing a wide delivery she should have left well alone, and Knight playing on attempting the withdrawal method… something that any British leader can tell you isn’t always entirely reliable… (eh Boris?)

Nat Sciver followed shortly after, playing do-si-do with a delivery from Masabata Klaas, who was obviously somewhat overshadowed by Kapp, but also returned some excellent figures, finishing with 2 for just 23 off 8 overs.

Amy Jones and Tammy Beaumont both had “ok” days, putting on 100 together and both grabbing 50s – Jones bringing to an end a run of indifferent scores over the winter. But one or the other really should have pushed on and turned 50 into 100. I know the commentators on TV are paid to cheerlead to a certain extent, but describing their performances as “absolutely magnificent” isn’t over-egging the pudding so much as making it entirely out of egg. Ash Gardner yesterday was absolutely magnificent. Or Harmanpreet versus the West Indies. Jones and Beaumont turned in a day at the office.

Nonetheless, 235 wasn’t a terrible score – it was, after all, nearly enough. If England’s ambitions are to mix it up with the likes of South Africa and India, it’s the kind of score that will win some and lose some. But if they want to be challenging Australia, they need to be doing Australia-like things, like scoring 100 off the last 10 overs. England today scored 3 boundaries in the final 15 overs – the same number Ash Gardner struck in the final over versus New Zealand. (On a different pitch, of course, but with the same bat and ball!)

As for South Africa, they didn’t exactly “ease” past Bangladesh, and they almost lost to Pakistan. I’m not convinced they are actually a better side than they were in 2017 – their top order is good… if by “top order” you mean Lee and Wolvaardt; but their tail arguably begins at 3. With Mignon du Preez in a terrible rut, with a string of sub-20 scores this year, Kapp has to rescue them far more often than I think they’d like to admit; but she keeps doing it, and she did it again today, sealing the Player of the Match gong with 32 off 42, and chivvying her side into a position where all they needed was one good over, which Katherine Brunt sent them wrapped up in a bow, conceding 10 runs when England really needed to keep it tight. That over got the required rate under 6, and South Africa realised that all they needed to do then was not lose their heads; while England looked like they knew they were about to be beaten by the better side on the day.

All isn’t entirely lost for England – if they win their final 4 games, and other results go their way, they can still make the semis. But the looks on their faces after the game reminded me of those on the faces of the West Indians after they got hammered by South Africa in 2017. It took the Windies 4 years to recover from that traumatic day in Leicester. Let’s hope it doesn’t take England until 2026 to do the same.

—–

* Capital punishment for murder was abolished in 1961, but it remained technically applicable for treason until 1989.

This week:

• A revolution in Ireland
• #CWC22 current standings
• Ash Gardner back with a vengeance
• Windies upset another apple cart
• What can & should England change from here

It was close… but not close enough for England, as they lost their second game in the World Cup to the surging West Indians, leaving them level on zero points from two games, at the bottom of the table with Bangladesh and Pakistan.

How much trouble are England in? Mathematically speaking, not that much: if they win all their remaining games, they still have a c. 99%* chance of qualifying. But that 1% is crucial – as things stand, their destiny is not in their own hands, so that even if they win all their remaining games, they could still find themselves missing out on a spot in the semi-finals.

More significantly, they’ve lost their “insurance policy” – with 3 of the big 5 still left to play (New Zealand, South Africa and India) if they lose again, they really are in a much more precarious situation. They would then very-much be dependent on other results, with only a 57% chance of qualifying even if they finished with 4 wins and 3 losses.

How did we get here? The general consensus against Australia was that England played pretty well – certainly their best ODI performance of the winter… though arguably that isn’t saying much after their Ashes drubbing!

But there were a few warning signs against Australia – they bowled 9 wide deliveries, conceding 21 runs (more than Australia’s margin of victory) in the process and the front-line seamers (Brunt, Shrubsole and Cross) took only 1 wicket, with Nat Sciver chipping in two more.

Against the Windies, the wides got worse – 13 wide deliveries, conceding 23 runs – and again the seam attack struggled to take wickets. After these two matches, the combined figures for the front-line seamers are 1-292.

The runs conceded to wides are a little bit of an occupational hazard of Amy Jones standing up to the stumps, which comes with some big advantages – not just the obvious one of more stumping opportunities, but because it forces the batters to be constantly worrying about being stumped, restricting their shot options coming out of the crease.

Nonetheless, 22 wide deliveries in two games is too many – Australia bowled just two versus England, and that should be the benchmark.

The inability to take wickets though is more worrying, because it has been “A Thing” since at least last summer – remember the last day of the Test v India? Yes, there were dropped catches; but they were mainly tough chances. (Nasser Hussein is very good – he is really leading this commentary team from the front, as he did so often when he captained England – but he was a little harsh on Lauren Winfield-Hill’s first-ball drop of Dottin – she had a long way to move, and only got anywhere near it because she was so sharp.)

Kate Cross can point to a spinner-like Economy Rate of 3.6 from 10 overs in mitigation; but the justification for playing her as well as Brunt, Shrubsole and Sciver – meaning England have a very samey, right-arm, medium paced, seam attack – is that she has been taking wickets in ODIs, not her economy.

Surely something has to change now, especially after Lauren Winfield-Hill failed again? As I’ve said before, LWH one of the BEST people in the game, but she’s not scoring runs in a spot that could be given-over to allowing England more bowling options, which they clearly need because Heather Knight was reduced to bowling herself for 7 overs, while clearly looking physically uncomfortable.

Here’s what I’d do for the next match, from the players available. (Remember, Lauren Bell is not available – she can’t be subbed into the squad unless someone gets COVID.):

1. Beaumont
2. Wyatt
3. Knight
4. Sciver
5. Jones
6. Dunkley
7. Brunt
8. Ecclestone
9. Cross
10. Dean
11. Davies

Yes Davies is another right-arm medium, and Farrant’s left-arm would add a bit of Salt’N’Vinegar to the variety pack; but Davies does give you more control, which England also need.

England’s World Cup isn’t over by any means, and the result against Australia shows that they can mix it with the best on their day, but the current bowling line-up is looking stale. It’s probably unfair to single out Anya Shrubsole… but I’m going to do it anyway: she was getting a lot of swing, but it was the same swing every delivery, even the slower balls, and the batters know it’s coming, so it didn’t trouble them.

And now it’s England who are in trouble.

——

* The exact maths employed here assumes no games are rained off (because there are still too many scenarios remaining (about 10.5 billion!) to do the numbers including rain on my little laptop!) but the percentages will be broadly correct.

England once again proved they are the best team in the world that aren’t called “Australia”, coming within a wallaby’s whisker of victory after the Southern Stars posted a huge 310-3. England’s 298-8 is the second-highest total ever made chasing in a women’s ODI; and would likely have won them the game against any other team in the world.

In terms of the tournament, this result is far from a disaster – this was a match that England could afford to lose; and the important thing is that they have done so with minimal damage to their Net Run Rate, which could be crucial in 3 weeks time, if semi-final qualification gets squeaky.

Australia aren’t fliers in ODIs at the best of times, but they started particularly slowly. England bowled well, making Healy look scratchy again, while Rachael Haynes dug in like a wintering wombat. Healy’s dismissal brought Meg Lanning to the crease, who joined Haynes in the wombat warren – at the 20-over mark, England had Lanning on 19 off 38 (a Strike Rate of 50) and Haynes on 22 off 47 (SR 47). But the important thing from an Australian perspective was that they were still there, and slowly but surely they began to rebuild towards that big total, and recover those strike rates up towards 100.

Haynes was the one to go big on this occasion, for just her second international century (it feels like she should have more!). But it wasn’t just that she went big – she accelerated too. Haynes wasn’t immune to the ‘Nervous Nineties’ but once she passed the milestone she absolutely smashed the death overs to put Australia just out of reach. Given the eventual margin of victory – 12 runs –  that was basically the difference between the sides.

England got off to pretty-much the worst possible start, with Heather Knight having to de-facto open the batting after Lauren Winfield-Hill was dismissed 3rd ball. Winfield-Hill was preferred to Emma Lamb up-top today – Lamb’s “run” in the side lasting just one match; but it is difficult to see how that can be justified going forwards – Lamb could hardly be doing any worse.

Knight and Tammy Beaumont played positively – as on the final day of the recent Ashes Test – and they obviously believed they could win the game. They got ahead of Australia early on the worm, and stayed there for the best-part of 40 overs.

Even at the very death – needing 16 off 6 – England obviously believed; but in an interesting parallel with yesterday’s match between South Africa and the West Indies, Jess Jonassen, who had been knocked out of the attack earlier after conceding 16 to Knight and Beaumont in 2 overs, played the role of Deandra Dottin (who hadn’t bowled at all in that game, but defended 6 off the final over) and broke up the party by taking the wickets of Brunt and then Ecclestone off the final ball.

Will there be changes for the game against the West Indies on Tuesday? None of England’s bowlers disgraced themselves by any means, and it would feel mighty unfair to drop any of them, but Heather Knight could perhaps have done with having a bit more variety up her sleeve – Ecclestone aside, all her options were right arm medium-fast; and while it is true that Anya Shrubsole is a different kettle of fish to Katherine Brunt, they perhaps aren’t different enough, especially once players like Rachael Haynes have got their eye in. Australia had 7 bowling options to choose from, and made use of them all; England had 5, and no joker to play when they needed a trick.

If you need an extra bowler, the place to find it is Winfield-Hill’s spot in the XI, which means moving Wyatt up to open with Beaumont and bringing in Dean or Farrant. But it feels like very-much the wrong time to be making drastic surgery to the batting line-up, so I’m not sure I’d actually do it; and Heather Knight is generally much more conservative than I am, so I wouldn’t expect it.

And besides, we shouldn’t lose sight of what we said just 8 short paragraphs ago – this was not a catastrophe for England’s chances of winning this World Cup. If anything, it should have given them hope that if they meet Australia again in the semi-final or final, they can match them. And if they play like this for the rest of the tournament, they will make that final – they just need to keep calm and carry on doing pretty-much what they did today.

The 8 Hundred teams this week announced their player retentions for 2022, and there were some big differences. Birmingham Phoenix for example retained almost their entire squad, whereas Trent Rockets let go most of theirs. There are also some substantial variations in remaining budgets – Rockets need to find 10 players, but have (on average) just £15,000 to spend per player. In contrast, Welsh Fire have a whopping £21,000 per player to splash the cash on 7 new faces.

On the overseas front, Oval Invincibles and Northern Superchargers retained all 3 of their overseas players, while Rockets and London Spirit will be looking for a full roster of 3 new overseas stars. (There is also going to be a 4th overseas “wildcard” pick to come for each team, but teams will still only be able to field 3 overseas players.)

Only two England players have not been retained – Lauren Winfield-Hill and Tammy Beaumont. Our guess (and it is only a guess) is that both chose not to remain, and already have other deals informally lined-up. (And 7 days quarantine in New Zealand would have been the perfect opportunity to learn the words to all 3 verses of ‘Land of My Fathers’ – in the original Welsh, of course – we’re just sayin’!!)

Deals may also have effectively been already agreed in the case of a number of the other twenty-odd domestic pros who will be changing colours this summer. Assuming all the overseas spots get filled, there are still 36 spots available for them, and some of the other regional players, up for grabs. Bryony Smith and Sophie Luff look like potential Best Buys, with Fran Wilson and Georgia Adams also likely to be snapped up soon, if not already.

It is also not out of the question that some of the ‘released’ players actually end up remaining with the team that has released them. For example, Invincibles need a wicket keeper, and have no overseas picks left (unless they use their wildcard, which would mean one of Kapp, van Niekerk and Ismail sitting on the bench), meaning there aren’t a lot of options, so they could ultimately turn back to Sarah Bryce, who did the job for them last year. (Though in that particular case, Kira Chathli, who finished last season with the gloves for the South East Stars, could equally well be lined-up for the role too.)

As for the overseas stars, almost everyone who’s anyone will be here for the Commonwealth Games, and there are some attractive salaries remaining. Suzie Bates, Amelia Kerr, Beth Mooney, Shafali Verma, Deandra Dottin – it looks likely to be a case of: take your pick, before someone else does!

1. 2021 Finishing Position
2. Average Budget Remaining / Player (£K)
✈ = Overseas

Key Free Agents

England

• Tammy Beaumont
• Lauren Winfield-Hill

Domestic Pros

• Georgia Adams
• Sarah Bryce
• Amy Campbell
• Aylish Cranstone
• Kelly Castle
• Bethan Ellis
• Jo Gardner
• Phoebe Graham
• Jenny Gunn
• Alex Hartley
• Lucy Higham
• Stere Kalis
• Marie Kelly
• Sophie Luff
• Fi Morris
• Rachael Slater
• Bryony Smith
• Fran Wilson
• Nat Wraith

England will host South Africa and India this summer, in a packed schedule in which they will play at least 23 days of cricket including the Commonwealth Games.

The international summer will begin with a Test versus South Africa at Taunton from June 27 – June 30; and finish with the 3rd ODI against India at Lord’s on September 24, the day before the Home of Cricket also hosts the RHF Trophy Final.

The South Africa Test – the Proteas first Test against England since 2003, also played at Taunton – will be followed by 3 ODIs, at Northampton, Bristol and Leicester, and 3 T20s at Chelmsford, Worcester and Derby.

Following the Commonwealth Games in early August, India will then return to England in September, although several of the players will presumably have stayed on for The Hundred. India will play 3 T20s at Durham (in England’s first visit to The Riverside since the 2013 Ashes), Derby and Bristol, and 3 ODIs at Hove, Canterbury, and then finally Lord’s.

All games will be shown on Sky Sports in the UK, with 2 of the T20 matches also being shown on the BBC. This is in addition to the Commonwealth Games matches, which will also be available Free To Air, meaning we could see an unprecedented 11 England games broadcast FTA this summer, if England reach the Commonwealth Games final – more games in a single summer than have ever been shown FTA in the UK before.

This, in combination with the return of live cricket to London and the North for the first time in several years, represents a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to grow the game, and no one is more pleased than us; though shareholders of Premier Inn have allegedly been warned to brace themselves for significant financial losses as Syd books in for 23 all-you-can-eat breakfasts!

England v South Africa

Test

Monday June 27-Thursday June 30 @ Taunton

ODIs

Monday July 11 @ Northampton
Friday July 15 @ Bristol
Monday July 18 @ Leicester

T20s

Thursday July 21 @ Chelmsford
Saturday July 23 @ Worcester
Monday July 25 @ Derby

England v India

T20s

Saturday September 10 @ Durham
Tuesday September 13 @ Derby
Thursday September 15 @ Bristol

ODIs

Sunday September 18 @ Hove
Wednesday September 21 @ Canterbury
Saturday September 24 @ Lord’s