"We get flak for not covering women's rugby, cricket and football enough, but it's expensive to cover and the level of interest makes it hard to justify."It's a pity; but it really puts into perspective the fantastic efforts that Cricinfo has made over the past couple of years to transform their coverage of the women's game, with more front-page headlines, equal billing for women's internationals (no longer listed under "Other") ball-by-balls, and proper match reports from the big games.
I'm sure the folks who run Cricinfo aren't doing this out of the goodness of their hearts though: they realize that by investing in the women's game, they are nurturing a level of interest which will grow the sport as a whole, and their page-views with it.
It is just ironic that The Guardian might have been around for a hundred years; but right now it is Cricinfo who are taking the long view; against the short-term, (men's) football-obsessed stance of their old-media competitor.
But of course, they are cricket people; so what else would you expect?