Monday, 1 September 2014

England Women v South Africa 1st T20

Some thoughts on England's win at Fortress Chelmsford...
  • From a South African perspective, I thought 89 was pretty-much a "par score" against an England attack that looked to have a bit more "bite" than it has so far this summer. I certainly don't think the Women Proteas should be in any way disheartened with their batting performance - remember, the historic average score in a women's international T20 innings is 108 (cf. 139 in "the other game"), so they really weren't massively short with the bat. (Although I can see why you might think so... if you mostly watched m's cricket!)
  • Shrubsole looks a different bowler in T20s - suddenly she was World T20 Anya again; and Brunt also looked the business. Hazell didn't though - this game last year (i.e. the Ashes T20 at Chelmsford) she was England's best bowler; but I'm afraid she hasn't been very good all summer and she wasn't great again tonight, so I think Farrant really has to play in the next match* - she isn't a like-for-like replacement, but she will do a similar job.
  • Why, oh why, oh why is Lauren Winfield opening the batting? I know she was "unlucky"... again... but I'm starting to wonder if the antitheses of an old adage is at work here: The more out of my depth I am, the unluckier I get! And it isn't like we don't have a solid, settled, classy opening alternative - so I really hope Heather is put back where she belongs ASAP.
  • It is a pity Danni Wyatt's one contribution was a horrible misfield, which was very out of character too - she is usually excellent in the outfield. I'd still really like to see her batting at "first drop", which I guess isn't going to happen, but I do hope she gets some chance to show in this series why we were all clamouring for her inclusion in this team.
  • Lottie. (Enough said.)
* Assuming she is fit - and I haven't heard anything to the contrary.


  1. Unfortunate for SA that their only two TV games have seen them outclassed by England. Not surprising and matches like this can only be good for them in the long run, but I do think they can perform better than this right now.
    I was hoping these matches would be a bit more competitive than than the T20s between Australia and Pakistan being played at the moment but this was just as lopsided a contest. Hopefully we'll see slightly smarter cricket in Northampton.

    89 may not be "that" low historically but it's still a pretty poor effort especially with a batting line up with this much power. To bat out the twenty overs only losing 4 wickets and posting a sub 100 total isn't great whatever way you slice it.
    I'd be interested to see the average total for a WT20I from the first five years of the format vs the last five.

    As you brought up the mens historical average I'd like to point out that when 115 is scored no-one tries to justify it as not that bad because it's about 82% of the historical average. It was a pretty low total. End of.
    And this isn't the comment of someone unfamiliar with women's cricket. I watch all the live streams I can (sleep permitting), and keep up with the scorecards of the series where TV or radio isn't available i.e most of them.
    The boundaries were probably too big though and I do realise SA were very rusty compared with England.

    The crumb of comfort for SA is that even with exactly the same personnel there is the potential to be much more competitive. They're bigger hitters than England and judging by the speed guns in this game and the World T20 semi final, their bowlers are pacier. England's bowlers get more movement though.

    As for England. Clinical. The match wasn't much of an entertainment but that was a suitably "professional" performance.

    Edwards' form ATM is remarkable. To see a player already established as one the best ever manage to reach a whole new level of consistency at this late stage of their career is amazing to watch.
    Very much akin to what Sangakarra is doing in the mens game currently.

    The likelihood is the next two matches will be more of the same but if the SA batting can come off in one of them we might just see an interesting contest.

  2. "And it isn't like we don't have a solid, settled, classy opening alternative - so I really hope Heather is put back where she belongs ASAP" - HK has opened 3 times for England in T20 and has scored 0, 2 and 13. That's none of solid, settled or classy and what she might or might not have done in other forms of the game (where an opener has far more time) is irrelevant to T20 (where they have to pitch off from ball 1).

    I agree there were some positive signs from her recent three outings at No3 when she scored her 3 highest scores in T20 (21*, 21 and 29) and 2 of the 3 were at greater than a run a ball and I certainly agree that a future England captain needs to be allowed to prove herself in all forms of the game.

    Let's face it, in the World Cup we just didn't work out how to play the first 6 overs (especially, of all people, Edwards and Taylor in the final) - and in some games even struggled with the remaining 14 !

    I suspect the best T20 batting lineups don't exist on paper. You select 6 or 7 batsmen and who comes in when depends on the state of the match and who has just been dismissed.

    Shrubsole and Brunt for me in the next T20 - come on it would be interesting and they would either score or get out.

  3. Harsh on Hazell. 10 dot balls, 2 4s, 1 wicket, 20 runs - [whisper] Gunn was worse. Hazell will play at Northants


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.