UPDATE: This piece was updated on 26/01/2023 in the light of further information about the distribution of TV money in the first 5 years of the competition.

The 5 successful bidders for the Indian WPL franchises have been announced by the BCCI, with teams set to be based in Mumbai, Delhi, Bengaluru, Ahmedabad and Lucknow.

Collectively they have bid about half a billion pounds for 10-year franchises – i.e. around £50 million per year. It’s a lot of money, so we have to ask: is it sustainable?

It bears repeating that these are businesses – they aren’t doing this as an act of charity – they need to make that money back; and that might be an issue going forwards.

In the short term, the BCCI have agreed to give 80% of the TV rights income back to the franchises for the first 5 years of the competition; but after that, the franchises are going to be on their own, and will need to recoup their investment from sponsorships and merchandising.

Barclays title sponsorship of England’s (men’s football) Premier League is reckoned to be worth about £40m per year – i.e. 10 million a year less than the WPL franchises collectively need to generate just to break even on their initial investment. (And that’s ignoring operating costs, which will likely be non-trivial.)

So that’s the kind of ball-park the franchises are playing in, in the medium term – and it isn’t going to be easy money to find. The attraction of women’s sport to sponsors right now, mainly rests on the fact that it is “good value” (i.e. cheap) – but this will not be. Whoever takes on these sponsorships is going to need seriously deep pockets – much deeper pockets than we’ve seen in England or Australia for women’s cricket to date.

It’s a huge challenge that the franchises have set themselves up for, and my guess is that while most of them will muddle through, some will struggle financially to break even on their investment and won’t survive.

Women’s cricket used to be a nice cosy world – that’s all changing now, with the promise that the top players will benefit to the tune of (literally) millions.

But if the franchises can’t bridge the gap between what they’ve agreed to pay to the BCCI and what they can persuade the sponsors to pay them, it could all end in tears very quickly. Welcome to the jungle, folks – there will be winners and losers… and the losers will get eaten.

By Andy Frombolton

Following the announcement of the England T20 squad, my mind turns to a possible counterfactual universe.

Several members of the current England squad enjoyed a considerable run in the team before eventually repaying the selectors’ faith; whilst conversely, more recently, a significant number of players have been picked and subsequently jettisoned without being given a decent run to prove (or disprove) the wisdom of their selection.

As we approach the T20 World Cup, I thought therefore it might be fun to choose a team of uncapped players who – had they been picked several years ago and given similar opportunities – might now be mainstays of the England T20 squad. I mused with a ‘less than 10 caps’ cut-off point as I’d like to have been able to pick both the Smiths (Bryony and Linsey), but the final selection criterion is binary, i.e. a player cannot have played a single match for England to be considered.

In picking the team, I also sought to address some of the weaknesses evident in many national squads, such as the lack of top-order left hand batters and too many weak fielders. 

I’ve also chosen not to be bound by conventional team structures; meaning, for instance, that my team only has 1 opening quick bowler since there wasn’t an obvious second option with good enough stats to justify their inclusion. 

But the team does have an incredible 10 genuine bowling options including 2 leggies (Levick and Armitage), 2 offies (Morris and Adams), plus Kelly’s ambidextrous offerings; ideal considering that the vast majority of batters, even at international level, score far more slowly off slow bowling. The team bats down to 9 with the option to use Gibson and/or Norris as sacrificial opening pinch-hitters, meaning Adams may need to drop herself down the batting order if the innings gets off to a good start.

The XI:

• Eve Jones
• Bess Heath (wk)
• Georgia Adams (capt)
• Aylish Cranstone
• Marie Kelly
• Holly Armitage
• Dani Gibson
• Naomi Dattani
• Fi Morris
• Tara Norris
• Katie Levick

“In counterfactual history, nothing is certain” (Robert Dallek).

Did I overlook any obvious candidates (and who then gets left out)? Conversely who should I have left out (and who gets their place instead)? Share your thoughts!

This week:

• England smash West Indies
• Injury setbacks for Capsey & Kemp
• Farewell to Mignon du Preez & Carla Rudd
• Have we missed an opportunity for red ball domestic cricket?

Beth Mooney topped the WBBL batting charts for the second season in succession, after also coming 2nd in 2020, though emphasising the fact that it was a pretty middling year for batters, she did so scoring considerably fewer runs than in either of her past two seasons – “just” 434 from 14 games, compared with 528 from 13 group stage games in 2021 and 524 from 13 games in 2020.

After winning the tournament in 2021, Mooney’s Scorchers failed to qualify for the knockouts this year, showing how quickly things can change between one season and another. The Sixers have shown this from the other perspective, going from last to first in the ladder, with a massive 4 of their batters ranked in the top 6 to put them at the head of the team batting metrics.

Ash Gardner looks to be locked-in for Player of the Tournament, having also finished 2nd in the bowling rankings; Ellyse Perry’s resurgent form has earned her an unexpected place in Australia’s squad for the India T20s, after she sat on the side-lines for the Commonwealth Games; Erin Burns has burned up any suggestion that she is over the hill at age 34; and Alyssa Healy also appears to have rediscovered prime form after a disappointing outing in 2021. Getting all those players singing from the same hymn-sheet after flopping so badly in 2021 is quite the feat… remind me who is coach of the Sydney Sixers again?

The highest ranked overseas player is Mignon du Preez at 4, with 366 runs at a strike rate of 124, helping the Hurricanes achieve their best ladder finish since WBBL02. Alice Capsey was the top English player, coming in 12th thanks in part to that remarkable 80 off 52 balls she hit for the Stars against the Hurricanes – an innings which was notable for not being just a “smash-and-grab” but a perfectly timed slow build which saw her smack 17 runs off the 19th over, and then a 4 off the first ball of the 20th, to win the match virtually single-handed.

Ranking = Runs * Strike Rate

Just weeks after losing her central contract, Lauren Winfield-Hill has been recalled to the England squad for the T20 series versus the West Indies next month.

After an outstanding summer in domestic cricket in 2022, winning The Hundred with Oval Invincibles and leading Northern Diamonds to victory in the RHF Trophy, Winfield-Hill has also had her best ever WBBL season, scoring 254 runs for Melbourne Stars with a best of 74 v Brisbane Heat.

England have named separate squads for the ODI and T20 series, with all of the contracted players except Tash Farrant (who is still in recovery from a stress fracture) named in at least one of the squads. The non-contracted Alice Davidson-Richards is included in the ODI squad only, alongside Tammy Beaumont, Kate Cross and Emma Lamb; while the T20 squad adds Katherine Brunt, Sarah Glenn and Issy Wong as well as Winfield-Hill.

The omission of Brunt from the ODI squad is perhaps the other big surprise, suggesting that having already retired from Tests she may be intending to focus exclusively on short-form cricket going forwards.

ODI Squad

Heather Knight (Western Storm)
Tammy Beaumont (Blaze)
Lauren Bell (Southern Vipers)
Alice Capsey (South East Stars)
Kate Cross (Thunder)
Alice Davidson-Richards (South East Stars)
Freya Davies (South East Stars)
Charlie Dean (Southern Vipers)
Sophia Dunkley (South East Stars)
Sophie Ecclestone (Thunder)
Amy Jones (Central Sparks)
Freya Kemp (Southern Vipers)
Emma Lamb (Thunder)
Nat Sciver (Northern Diamonds)
Danni Wyatt (Southern Vipers)

T20 Squad

Heather Knight (Western Storm)
Lauren Bell (Southern Vipers)
Katherine Brunt (Northern Diamonds)
Alice Capsey (South East Stars)
Freya Davies (South East Stars)
Charlie Dean (Southern Vipers)
Sophia Dunkley (South East Stars)
Sophie Ecclestone (Thunder)
Sarah Glenn (Central Sparks)
Amy Jones (Central Sparks)
Freya Kemp (Southern Vipers)
Nat Sciver (Northern Diamonds)
Lauren Winfield-Hill (Northern Diamonds)
Issy Wong (Central Sparks)
Danni Wyatt (Southern Vipers)

Megan Schutt produced a come-from-behind win after taking a record 6 wickets in the Strikers’ final match of the group stages versus Thunder, to top this year’s bowling rankings with 23 wickets at an Economy Rate of 6.40 – pipping Ash Gardner (23 wickets at 6.42) by just 2 hundredths of a run.

Schutt led a Striker-Force (!) which topped the overall bowling metrics for this year’s competition, with their five core bowlers (Schutt, Wellington, Barsby, Darcie Brown and Dottin) doing almost all the work, bowling 93% of the Strikers overs between them.

Undoubtedly the most surprising name in the Top 10 is that of Sasha Moloney – the 30-year-old journeyman transferred over to the Stars this season after spending her entire career with Tasmania/ Hobart, and had a golden six weeks in the Melbourne green. Initially bowling at first-change, she was then promoted to opening the bowling in the second half of the competition, finishing with 20 wickets at a better Economy Rate than either of the bowlers above her.

Amanda Jade Wellington came out on top in the battle of the Australian leg-spinners, taking 4 more wickets than Alana King; though King returned a significantly superior Economy Rate, which is likely what was influencing the Australian selectors when they picked the latter in their squad for the up-coming series against India.

Sophie Ecclestone, in her first WBBL season with the Sydney Sixers, was the highest ranked overseas bowler at 8, just ahead of Amelia Kerr at 9. Ecclestone’s success could be considered something of a personal triumph against the received wisdom amongst the Aussie commentariat that she struggles in Australia because her stock delivery is too quick to get any grip and turn on their fast, bouncy pitches – a view which misses the point that turn has never really been what Ecclestone is about anyway, and which we can hopefully put to bed now.

Ranking = Wickets / Economy

Six players – Lauren Bell, Alice Capsey, Charlie Dean, Freya Kemp, Emma Lamb and Issy Wong – have all earned their first England contracts in the biggest shake-up to the squad since professional contracts arrived in 2014.

Emma Lamb and Charlie Dean both made their debuts against New Zealand last September, with Lauren Bell and Issy Wong following in the Test versus South Africa this summer, whilst Alice Capsey and Freya Kemp were first called up for the Commonwealth Games in Birmingham.

In terms of those moving on, in addition to Fran Wilson and Anya Shrubsole who had already been released from last year’s squad after announcing their retirements, England have stepped down Mady Villiers, Lauren Winfield-Hill, Georgia Elwiss and Katie George.

Of these four, only Winfield-Hill played for England in 2022, earning her final cap as a contracted player versus West Indies at the World Cup in March. Mady Villiers last played for England in a T20 v New Zealand in September 2021; Georgia Elwiss played in the Test against India at Bristol in June 2021, but hasn’t played a white-ball game since 2019; while Katie George was last capped in an ODI v New Zealand in July 2018.

All four will presumably step down to regional contracts (to be announced in due course), and having not formally retired there remains no reason why they couldn’t yet win further England caps down the line. Meanwhile the domestic setup will only be stronger for their presence, as the regions move closer towards full professionalism, with at least 80 players expected to be contracted to regional teams by next summer.

The full list of contracted players is below:

• Tammy Beaumont (Lightning)
• Lauren Bell (Southern Vipers)
• Katherine Brunt (Northern Diamonds)
• Alice Capsey (South East Stars)
• Kate Cross (Thunder)
• Freya Davies (South East Stars)
• Charlie Dean (Southern Vipers)
• Sophia Dunkley (South East Stars)
• Sophie Ecclestone (Thunder)
• Tash Farrant (South East Stars)
• Sarah Glenn (Central Sparks)
• Amy Jones (Central Sparks)
• Freya Kemp (Southern Vipers)
• Heather Knight (Western Storm)
• Emma Lamb (Thunder)
• Nat Sciver (Northern Diamonds)
• Issy Wong (Central Sparks)
• Danni Wyatt (Southern Vipers)

The next round of central contracts is to be shortly announced and will run from November 1^st. Securing one of these contracts is primarily about recognition, but it would be naïve to ignore the associated financial rewards.

The current batch of 17 central contracts was awarded following what the ECB described as “a comprehensive and objective process” which saw all the existing contracts renewed (except Kirstie Gordon, replaced by Sophia Dunkley).

A positive spin on this would be that this demonstrated that, upon fair review, the existing squad members were adjudged to still be the best players in the country. A negative spin would be that, despite all the money and resource invested in the regional academies and the KSL, the system had produced only one cricketer capable of displacing any of the incumbents.

Less easy to justify was the usually-long duration of these contracts – 18 months; timed “to align with the professional contracts at the eight regional teams”. The first (obvious) observation is that 6-month contracts could also have achieved the same alignment. More crucially, by awarding 18-month contracts the ECB was perpetuating the ‘closed shop’ for two more seasons; committing to the same group of players regardless of their individual form or evolving team strategies whilst also ruling out the ability to award a central contract to anyone else for this entire period. Effectively nothing anyone did during 2021 (including the first season of The Hundred) could secure them a central contract whilst, conversely, holders of a central contract were guaranteed their status (and pay) regardless of performances or their level of involvement in England matches.

So, what happened?

Games During Contract Period

Obviously no one would expect teams to be chosen solely from the centrally-contracted cohort – but the right squad of 17 should contribute the vast majority of any team.

In fact, 9 players without central contracts were called up to the various teams; winning 93 caps (just under 20%).

Games During Contract Period

In addition, Emily Arlott would have made her Test debut if she hadn’t caught Covid and it’s reasonable to surmise that Tash Farrant would also have played if she hadn’t been injured.

Could anyone have predicted in May 2021 which of these 9 (or 11) would have played for England in the next 18 months? Perhaps Emma Lamb? But six months later, by October 2021, Dean had already played 5 ODIs and Bouchier 2 T20s and most observers could have confidently predicted the names of several other players who’d win their England caps in the next 12 months.

So, with the next round of central contracts due to be announced imminently, what could be done differently this time?

England’s selection process is unquestionably far more sophisticated than the days of Kirstie Gordon and Linsey Smith’s short careers (or Bryony Smith and Alice Davidson-Richard’s first incarnations), in which case all 11 of these players must be assumed to be genuine contenders for a central contract.

Yet, the only certainty is that there are 2 contracts available following the retirements of Anya Shrubsole and Fran Wilson. And 11 doesn’t go into 2!

Some of the associated conversations will therefore be difficult with significant consequences for those affected (whether positively or adversely), yet surely there is an argument that, however fair and objective the selection process, the current structure is unnecessarily binary, restrictive and incapable of accommodating the very different teams which England might want to field for e.g., the world cup compared to the Ashes.

One easy improvement would be to have 2 types of central contracts. Instead of funding 17 full contracts (i) with the risk that some players don’t / rarely play) and (ii) having no ability to accommodate emerging talent, why not fund e.g., 12 full contracts for those players envisaged to form the core of any team across the formats and 10 incremental contracts for fringe players / emerging players / restricted format players (reserving 1 or 2 of these to be awarded based on performances after the World Cup or even the County Championship or Charlotte Edwards Cup).

This would give greater financial security to more players, increase the talent pool of centrally-contracted players, facilitate improved format-specific squad selection and provide the flexibility to recognise players who press their case for selection mid-term.