The ongoing row between FIFA and the TV companies over the value of broadcast rights for the upcoming Women’s World Cup in Australia and New Zealand this summer (or this winter, if you are actually in Australia or New Zealand) is a watershed moment for women’s sport, and a dangerous one. But the real danger isn’t quite what everyone wants you to think it is.

In a nutshell, FIFA are threatening to withhold the TV rights to the Women’s World Cup from European broadcasters unless they pony-up significantly more cash, insisting that the rights are worth something much closer to what the TV companies pay for the men’s tournament. In a spectacular display of chutzpah, they are invoking equality to make their argument – suggesting that the TV companies are now the ones holding back the growth of women’s sport.

The broadcasters in return argue that they just don’t have any more money.

And the thing is… the broadcasters have a point.

The BBC in particular can’t just pop down to Cash Converters and magic-up more wonga – it can’t sell more ads, or put up subscriptions – its income is based on the license fee, which is currently frozen until 2024, at a time when inflation is running at well over 10%. Every penny it spends on buying the rights to the Women’s World Cup is a penny it can’t spend on other things… like… cricket.

ITV isn’t quite that constrained, but the emphasis is on “quite” – it would have to sell a lot of adverts (at some not-exactly-prime times, given the schedule of a tournament on the other side of the world) to justify paying more. Again, if it does, that’s probably money that is going to come from something else too.

So we’ve reached a crossroads – one where we must face an important question. But what is that question?

If you ask FIFA, the question is: Are the rights to the women’s tournament worth the same as the men’s?

But the real question is this: Are we going to take let FIFA blackmail us into taking yet more money from other sports (like… say… random example… cricket!) and giving it instead to the richest sport on the planet?

In short: Are we going to continue to let football eat everything?

And when you look at it like that, I think we probably know what the right answer is.

So how can we cut through and reach a solution?

We all (well… everyone reading this site, anyway) want more money for women’s sport, and FIFA do have a point that the rights for the men’s and women’s tournaments should be of equal value.

But as someone once said, there is no magic money tree! Increasingly, the only way to find more money for women’s sport is going to be to cut some of our spend on men’s sport.

In this particular case, the broadcasters have wayyyy overpaid for the rights to the (men’s) World Cup – an event that legally has to be shown on free-to-air TV – for far too long, and that needs to change. So the answer is for the BBC to offer FIFA more money for the Women’s World Cup – but only if they accept a corresponding deduction in the value of the men’s rights.

Long term, that is the only sustainable solution for a fair balance not only between men’s and women’s sport, but also between football and every other game on the planet.

The Blaze have defended their decision to play at Welbeck Cricket Club, after their match against Thunder was abandoned on Monday despite no rain falling all day, due to an unsafe pitch.

CRICKETher understands that the pitch had been used for a men’s club match on Saturday, and that play continued despite falling rain, meaning that the bowler’s run-ups were churned up and unusable by the time Monday’s regional fixture came around.

The umpires were forced to call off the fixture at 2.00pm, meaning that the points on offer were split equally between the two teams.

James Cutt, The Blaze’s Director of Cricket, told CRICKETher:

“While any matchday where we are not able to get onto the field of play is clearly frustrating, this has been a challenging summer nationwide in terms of the sheer amount of wet weather we have suffered – an issue which was only exacerbated by some poor localised weather over the weekend.

“With areas of the ground then failing to improve sufficiently on the day, we recognised, alongside the match officials, that conditions weren’t appropriate for a professional game of cricket, and that the risk to injury remained too high if we were to go ahead and play the game.

“The John Fretwell Centre has a strong recent history of staging professional cricket, with nine Nottinghamshire men’s fixtures staged there over the past eight years, so it’s a setup which is used to the demands of that level of the game.

“We’re really keen to ensure we take The Blaze around the East Midlands this summer, to ensure that this is a team which people across the region can invest their support in, and that we can inspire girls and boys from around the region to pick up a bat and ball.”

The ECB would be within their rights to penalise The Blaze for the incident. The Rachael Heyhoe Flint Trophy Playing Conditions state that the home team must ensure venues are suitable for play 72 hours prior to the scheduled fixture or arrange an alternative, and that “failure to comply with this… may result in the deduction of points from a Regional Host and the possible award of additional points to another Regional Host”.

Perhaps a greater concern is that this may not be a one-off. The expansion of the regional calendar this season means that a number of regional fixtures are now being played at club grounds. The Blaze are returning to Welbeck twice more this season; while Central Sparks played a “home” fixture against Southern Vipers at Wormsley Cricket Ground on Monday, despite this being within Buckinghamshire (home territory of the Vipers!) Is women’s regional cricket losing out in the battle for pitches to men’s club cricket, and is this acceptable in 2023?

It may have been the 1st of May, but no one had told the weatherman, who served up a morning of April showers at Wormsley as Central Sparks trudged towards a sub-par 183-9. But the sun came out to shine on the Vipers’ pursuit, as they survived a couple of wobbles to chase down their target with 3 wickets and the better part of 9 overs to spare.

Sent in by Vipers captain Georgia Adams, Sparks openers Eve Jones and Chloe Brewer were ready to get the game underway at 10:30 before a violent rain shower sent everyone rushing back to the thatched-roofed Wormsley pavilion as the covers were rushed on, delaying the start of play by twenty minutes.

With the match finally underway at around 10:50, Eve Jones played out a maiden to Lauren Bell’s first over, before Charlie Dean opened at the opposite end – a match-up likely intended for Jones, who Dean has got out twice in regionals. But it was Chloe Brewer who found herself heading back early, caught and bowled by Dean for a two-ball duck.

This brought Abbey Freeborn to the crease, who put on 56 with Jones on her way to a slightly tortuous 43 off 96 balls.

Jones herself was adjudged LBW to Georgia Elwiss for 34 in the 19th over. Replays suggested the decision was arguable, with the ball looking to be going down leg, but with no DRS in regional cricket, Jones had to go; and there was no doubt whatsoever about the dismissal of Davina Perrin two balls later – comprehensively bowled by Elwiss with middle stump pegged-back.

Freeborn continued in partnership with Ami Campbell, who led Sparks’ brightest phase of the game. An over from Elwiss went for 9, and one from Alice Monaghan for 10, putting Sparks 88-3 at the half-way mark, still with a shout of passing 200 if they maintained their pace; but they couldn’t do so, and Freeborn ultimately became the first of Georgia Adams’ 4 victims in the 35th over.

Katie George did her best to liven things up in a brief cameo, which included her and Campbell sending a rare Danni Wyatt over for 15. But even though George’s 23 off 28 represented by far the best strike rate of the Sparks innings, it was still only 82, and once she was dismissed the wheels really started to rattle as Sparks subsided to 183-9, some way short of a par total these days in domestic cricket, albeit in conditions which were not ideal.

Sparks’ only hope was to bowl Vipers out, and they got off to the perfect start – Grace Potts catching McCaughan for 0 off Emily Arlott in the opening over. Having made quick runs at the back end of the Vipers innings on Saturday, Elwiss found herself in very different territory trying to navigate the powerplay with Maia Bouchier. Elwiss defended and defended, never really looking comfortable against the pace of Arlott or Potts, and was next out in the 9th over for 6 off 28 balls, with Vipers 13-2 off the first 9 overs.

A 9-run 10th over made the powerplay look slightly better, but at 22-2 Vipers were still far short of where Sparks had been at the same stage – 30-1.

Danni Wyatt came and went, unable to resist a classic Issy Wong full toss – planting it into the hands of Chloe Brewer – and Bouchier followed shortly afterwards for 25 off 39 balls. At 46-4 Vipers did not look comfortable, and a repeat of their season-opening loss to Sunrisers could definitely have been on the cards.

But a 115 run partnership between Georgia Adams (50) and Charlie Dean (42) turned the tide, taking them to within touching distance of the target at 161. It wasn’t champagne cricket… it wasn’t even prosecco cricket… but it was effective cricket, as Adams and Dean dialled down the risk meter to get the job done.

The dismissals of Adams and Dean in consecutive overs gave the Sparks a bit of hope, but Emily Windsor (10) and Rhianna Southby (8 off 7 – the only innings in the game with a strike rate of 100) carried Vipers home for their second win of the bank holiday weekend.

Southern Vipers bounced back in style after their humiliation at the hands of Sunrisers last week, with an emphatic 158-run win against South East Stars at Beckenham.

On what felt like the first sunny day of the year, Georgia Adams chose to bat first; and Vipers vindicated that decision by putting 287 on the board.

After Maia Bouchier and Ella McCaughan shared a century opening stand, a run-a-ball half-century from Georgia Elwiss at no.4 helped them finish well.

However, Beckenham is renowned for being a decent batting wicket, and the boundary rope was (inexplicably) 10 yards shorter than usual for this game. Stars therefore emerged after the innings break audibly confident about their chances.

Nobody was more confident than Capsey, who looked (as ever) a cut above the rest. She helped Stars to 25 for 0 in the first four overs, and played the shot of the day – a beautiful cover drive.

But the next two overs from Lauren Bell decimated the Stars. Firstly, and most crucially, she bowled Capsey with one which nipped back in to take out her off stump. The next ball, Ryana MacDonald-Gay was adjudged LBW.

Bryony Smith saw off the first hat-trick ball; but then created a chance for a second, as Bell took another two-in-two in her following over. Smith fell to an excellent low catch by Charlie Dean at cover, before Alice Davidson-Richards wafted at one outside off stump and Bouchier snaffled it at slip.

Fresh from scoring her first century in a decade against Thunder last weekend, Paige Scholfield again looked the most assured of the Stars batters, striking the ball cleanly on the way to 31 off 63 balls.

But she was bowled going down on one knee trying to slog Adams in the 27th, and Stars gradually succumbed to their fate – all out for 129 in the 37th over.

Oddly, Stars had earlier chosen not to open the bowling with England’s Freya Davies, instead opting for the combination of Tash Farrant and Phoebe Franklin.

That allowed Bouchier and McCaughan to find their feet and build a platform, which Elwiss and Adams (31) built on with a 76-run partnership for the 4th wicket.

Stars ultimately used a mammoth 9 bowlers, mostly in vain, as Vipers enjoyed a day of regaining their mojo.

In December, in response to the success of the Lionesses in the Women’s Euros, the UK Parliament’s Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee set up an inquiry into women’s sport and invited the submission of written evidence.

The terms of reference for the inquiry are:

1. How can the growth in domestic women’s football be accelerated?
2. What should other sports be learning from the growth of women’s football leagues in the UK?
3. What is needed for women’s sporting organisations to grow audiences and revenues?
4. What action is needed to tackle sexism and misogyny in sport?
5. What needs to change at a regulatory level to facilitate more parity between men’s and women’s sport?

In my evidence, I focused on Question 5. Those of you who follow The CRICKETher Weekly will be aware that I have quite strong views about how cricket (and other women’s sports) should be governed!

My current research project at Bournemouth University looks at the way in which women’s sporting organisations were forced into “mergers” with men’s sporting organisations in the 1990s – including the Women’s Cricket Association, which (having run women’s cricket since 1926) was absorbed by the newly-formed ECB in 1998.

My research shows that these mergers were not desired by those within women’s sport – they were, largely, government-mandated. The merger “negotiations” were dominated by male voices and priorities, and subsequently (in my view) the mergers stymied the growth and development of women’s sport.

In my evidence, I argue that merged governance (where women’s and men’s sport are run by the same governing bodies) is not always the best way to promote parity between men’s and women’s sport. I also recommend that the Government give serious consideration to the adoption of a model of devolved / separate governance of women’s sport.

That might sound extreme – but it’s important to think hard about why women’s sport hasn’t yet achieved parity with men’s sport. Maybe it’s time to get radical?

A number of National Governing Bodies also submitted evidence to the inquiry, including England Netball, the FA and the RFU. (The ECB didn’t, though – aside from a short joint submission with the FA, LTA, RFU and RFL calling for the Government to improve sport for girls in schools.)

You can read my evidence, as well as all other submissions, here – it’s worth a look!

So, what happens next? Usually, the Committee moves now to oral evidence sessions, so it’s possible I may get a summons to appear before the Committee and present my suggestions there.

After that, an overall report will be compiled with recommendations for the Government, based on all the evidence presented. I’ll keep you updated once that final report is published. The Government don’t have to act on it, of course, but it could make for very interesting reading!