Doing this.

I know you guys can barely believe that I’m not in South Africa, on extravagant expenses, lapping up the vibes and the cricket… but I’m not. I’m in a ver-ry grooovy caff in West Wales (cos have no internet yet, at my new farmtastic place of residence). In between coffee and molesting an outrageous sausage, bacon (and I’m afraid black pudding) sarnie on sourdough, I hope to cover Eng v South Africa in my usual inimitable style. So with and without apologies: let’s do this.

The artist formerly known as Brunt. Gets the away-swinger going – but too short and wide. Four: Wolvaardt. But then good and straight: so nothing else. Bell will follow. Bright sunshine, decent breeze. Looks to me as though coach has been telling the young strike bowler to *really run in*. Have no issue with that but that can lead to ill-discipline. Not here. Another goodish over; South Africa 8 for 0 after 2.

All the talk pre-game has been about how South Africa have to raise their level of dynamism. They’re under-achieving again, early doors, with Brits in particular playing lovely shots at the fielders. England will engage GO HARD from the get-go – you just have to. Risk is more about avoiding stasis than avoiding the loss of wickets. 9 for 0, after a fine over from K S-B. A lovely situation for Ecclestone to enter the fray.

Brits slog-sweeps the spinner powerfully: much-needed. But still the locals are being contained. Dean comes in to bowl the 5th and surely Brits and Wolvaardt must attack her? They do raise firstly the energy and then Wolvaardt smoothes a beauty high and handsome for six runs, over extra cover. Fabulous. 28 for 0 after 5.

Nat Sciver-Brunt is in – so five bowlers used within the powerplay. Interesting. Think Knight is merely trying to tinker with the opposition’s expectations. Unusually, N S-B, despite mixing short-balls with slower back-of-the-hand efforts, is relatively expensive. Powerplay yields 37 for no loss. So even, you might say?

Sarah Glenn. Pitch looks dry but she tends not to get a bundle of spin: is more about loop and consistency – lots of balls hitting the stumps. 7 from the over. Ecclestone in again, unusually; skipper often looks to hold her back for mid and late bamboozlery. Looks to be a beautiful day, in Cape Town. Six singles bring up the 50, with 8 overs now done.

Wolvaardt clouts N S-B, highish on the bat but well beyond the on-side ring. She has quality: a long knock from her and some real fireworks from A N Other – Kapp: Tryon? – could put the home side in a strong position. But they have to build the dynamism rather than allow things to flatten. Brits clumps Glenn hard and straight, to go to 25 off 28. Wolvaardt goes past 1,000 international T20 runs. They both look comfortable but arguably – arguably – this is still closer to a cruise than a launching. It may be more than acceptable but is it match-winning?

Dean will bowl the eleventh. Despite the lack of wickets, England are likely to be content – and content to be patient. Knight is a past-master of slowish, ‘tactical’ games. They will believe that they can and will ‘make something happen’ and also that they will score more quickly than the high sixes – where South Africa are firing, currently.

Wolvaardt targets Bell, interestingly. She drives hard, repeatedly, forcing aerial, slightly fortunate runs and disrupting the bowler (who goes wide). Eleven from the over. Run rate 6.92 after 12. The batters have to sustain something around ten, you suspect, to get to 160-plus. Any less and England, on a pitch that looks very true, with impressive batting depth and explosivity, should come through this. (My hunch is that the scoreboard may need to read 170 or more, for England to fall short, here).

Ecclestone – who else? – draws the error. Wolvaardt mistimes and the leading-edge flies to Dean. A gift. A very fine 53 for the South African opener. Kapp – one of the great players of the modern era – marches in. She has a fabulous, aggressive temperament and the physical presence to lead a charge.

It’s Brits, however, who thrashes Glenn straight for six, to bring up the 100. Then, importantly, you sense, the batter repeats. A ragged, wide delivery allows the batter to climb in to a slash through cover, to raise her own 50. Big Moment? Possibly. 18 from that 15th over. South Africa 116 for 1: meaning they are in this.

Brits is inventing stuff, now: is into fearless mode. Kapp tries to match that, but utterly miscues the drive. Again it falls safe. Rightly, nearly everything is getting the hammer, typically up and over the circle. Batting in reserve – in particular, you might want Tryon in there for a decent lump of balls. So absolutely go at it. Wickets falling does not matter now.

Dean fails either to catch or stop a dying ball: Sciver-Brunt K is unimpressed. It was poor. A poor throw from the same player to the same bowler, with Kapp scampering, elicits a similarly tart response – again understandably. Not good, from England.

We’re back to a block of pace, as Bell follows the raging Brunt. Run rate goes past 8 for the first time during the over. Brits smashes another one straight but S-B K is austerely cool under the dropping ball. Makes the testing catch look straight-forward, as if making a statement to some of her young colleagues.

Tryon is in, briefly. She mistimes one then clumps the next rather clumsily, straight to Nat Sciver-Brunt. 145 for 3, suddenly. Ten balls remain.

Now quality tells. Ecclestone is bowling fluent, floaty deliveries which the batters, under pressure, cannot cope with. De Klerk plays all round a peach and is gone. Three runs and two wickets, in the over. Sensational. South Africa jerked to a halt. Kath Sciver-Brunt, who has bowled well-enough today, will see this out. She starts with an outrageous, loopy, back-of-the-hand delivery. Luus takes one to square-leg.

Ah. Another wild slower ball arrives at the crease about a foot above waist height. Shocker. Dismissed for four. Free hit. Feels like the End of Something – meaning Brunt’s career. England try to move the field but can’t. A discussion. Bouncer: Kapp takes two. Another short one – single taken. Classical-but-violent cover drive brings up the 160, with a single ball to come. Kapp middles through midwicket. 164 for 4 posted. Game wonderfully alive with possibilities.

Both sides will probably feel they could have done a tad better. South Africa might have added 20 to their score if they’d been more positive earlier. England were o-kaay but not special in the field – Dean, Capsey, Dunkley and Ecclestone are all fallible, eh? – and only the left-armer looked a real threat with the ball. 165 is a strong score but England’s intent is rarely in question, now. This may, then, be all about levels of composure. That and where the pill flies, as England hit with freedom. The pitch appears to offer the batters a chance.

Wyatt swings Mlaba over her shoulder for four, then the bowler contrives to sling one about two feet down leg – truly appallingly. But England are scrambling, suddenly. Is there an early gift? No. Eleven from the over – a messy one. Dunkley will face Ismail.

The batter swats one through the fielder at mid-on. Four. Then offers the maker’s name but just grabs the single. A short one beats the keeper to her left and England have 21 from 2 – not what the home crowd would have wanted. Can Kapp straighten-out the early sloppiness?

Wyatt swishes and gets most of one outside off. Ismail does well to haul it in. (Or does she?) Not quite. The bowler is going bold and full: she may have got a touch of away swing on one occasion. The all-rounder is unlucky, though, as Dunkley chases a slower ball and under-edges through slip. England are 30 for 0 after 3. (South Africa were 9 for 0).

Dunkley comes at Khaka. She gets another edge through slip – four more. Then Wyatt is slashing cleanly and characteristically over cover. Wolvaardt does get a fingertip… but middled, deserved the boundary. 40 for 0. And England continue to charge. Mlaba concedes consecutive boundaries: make that three. 52 for 0 after 4.4 overs. Stunning, from the favourites.

The hosts need something and here it is: Ismail tucks Dunkley up just enough. She hoists and is caught for 28 off 16, at square leg. Capsey will join Wyatt, who has 16 from 15.

WOW! Capsey – perhaps unwisely? – fend-hooks away a short one and Brits takes probably the catch of the tournament. (Full stretch dive and claw. Thrilling). Two minutes ago, England were saying ‘hold my beer’. Now the locals are in the cricket equivalent of Gazza’s dentist’s chair. Two wickets, two runs, in the over. The mighty Nat S-B has joined us. 55 for 2, after the powerplay.

Wyatt looks good. Can play within herself and still get 9/10 an over. Sciver-B hits harder than almost anybody in the game. Runs are still coming, even after the losses. Run rate just shy of 10. Kapp.

Tidy over but inevitably N S-B drives one clear of the circle and clips and clubs to leg. When Wyatt glides to third, another eight runs have been added. 75 for 2 after 8: England ahead on the rate. Mlaba has conceded 22 from her first two overs. No wonder she blows hard, before coming in to Wyatt. Boom – four!

De Klerk follows. N S-B is a wee bit sloppy, but no dramas. Wyatt has 33 from 26: is dropping and running. Off-cutters, from the bowler – staying lowish. Just three from the over. Drinks.

Did the break bring the wicket? Who knows? But it’s Wyatt that perishes. Awful ball, simply hoiked round at the grateful fielder. Good knock, mind. 86 for 2. Enter the captain – meaning the best two batters are together, at a key time. In some ways I reckon Knight could/should come in earlier, but understand why the youthful vigour and all-round boomtasticism of Capsey and Dunkley takes precedence.

The required run-rate has crept closer to 9 and the crowd is back in the game. De Klerk has gone well: England now need 73 from 48. Tryon will bowl the 13th. A reverse, from Knight. Might be the inning’s first? Then N S-B absolutely demolishes one for six. All parties engaged, as we get those Denouement Nerves a-bubbling. 63 from 42 needed.

Kapp will bowl the 15th and N S-B will pull her to midwicket. An extravagant slower-ball is biffed impressively past the fielder on the circle and will beat long-off – just. Marginal misfield from Ismail allows the second. Ten from the over. 48 from 30. Ismail. (Great part of any game. Two of the best batters in the world against two of the best bowlers. Fab-yoo-luss!)

N S-B garners two boundaries – both behind her. Feels huge. Ismail responds with a tremendous yorker… but of course N S-B digs it out. Aah – error from the keeper, who has been mixed. Crucially, Sciver-Brunt squishes the last ball around to the boundary at fine leg. 10 from the over.

De Klerk, statistically the leading bowler on the day, draws N S-B into an error. Brits takes the catch at long-on. Felt like this batter was carrying her team home yet again… but off she must trudge. Jones will replace her.

Fascinatingly, de Klerk bowls two consecutive full-tosses; presumably that’s pressure-related? England need 28 runs from the last three overs: Khaka returneth.

Jones drives her, off-balance, head-high, to mid-off. Easy grab. Now the locals have a chance. Ecclestone is in, and she can hit, but is she a batter? No. She nearly offers a caught and bowled, first up. Sciver-Brunt K is next… and she has been decidedly average with the bat for an age. So Knight is important, now. Especially as Ecclestone fails – miscuing to mid-off. The home team marginal favourites, now.

Ah. Sciver-Brunt K is plum. England are scrambled; they review ver-ry late. (Even if it’s plum, they surely must review!) THREE WICKETS IN THE OVER. Game done? 25 from 12 needed. Glenn will face Kapp. Later in the over, Knight strikes just big enough for six, but no doubting who’s ahead on points.

We get into the last over and Knight can’t get Ismail away. Suddenly England need 12 from 4 balls. The skipper swings hard but simply misses… and the bowler can wheel away in triumph. It clipped the batter’s thigh on the way through but nobody cares. The Proteas are home. Neither Glenn nor Dean have the power to clatter this bowling and they don’t. It’s a home final and no argument.

The book will say that’s a win by 6 runs. De Klerk and Ismail and Khaka central to it. Let them enjoy the moment… and here’s hoping they can find some of that inspiration for the championship finale. England will be foaming and sad and angry and regretful and *all those things*.

Wyatt and N S-B and to a lesser extent Dunkley are entitled to be disappointed that no-one backed them up. Despite the allegedly strong batting line-up, the side again looked vulnerable beyond Our Nats. Jones failed, Kath S-B is shot as a bat, Ecclestone will only occasionally biff a few, and Glenn and Dean are bowlers who can contribute in longer formats (maybe). So the likes of Capsey must contribute for this to work. They will, often, but today not so much.

It would be remiss of me not to register that for big chunks of this tournament, England have looked a very good outfit. Even now they remain the biggest competitive threat to Australia. But as with the Commonwealth Games, those of us cursed and blessed with Supportive Realism find ourselves notching this one into the Underachievements column. Shame. But hey – what a great day for the locals! For them the three wicket over and the incredi-catch from Brits will live long in the memory.

Rising?

Facts are rare, in sport, but I’m happy enough to gamble on the following: that Australia are the best side in the world, by a distance. Still: after an age – the Age of Perry and Manning. But the lurch towards Big Animal status occurring right now in India and the sometimes convincing but mostly game chase from Ingerland offers hope of a meaningful tournament (as opposed to another procession) in South Africa. India are finally rising – or the profile, the lakh, the strengthening of commitments is – and England are arguably close-ish to Aussie strength in individual terms. What Australia appear to have is an implacable will, depth and a culture of winning that may again be at a higher level than either of the two leading contenders.

I fully expect Australia to win this competition, but it’s not only tribal allegiances that raise the notion that some other name on the trophy might be a good thing for the wider game. Today we had the opportunity – as did Australia – of sizing-up the only real threats to Southern Stars dominance, as England and India met, at St George’s Oval.

Here’s how it felt: I note that my sense of this win – a ‘five out of ten performance’ – is significantly less appreciative than a) Heather Knight’s and b) some other pundits. I stand by what I said live. This game was a little dispiriting, in the sense that it depressed aspirations for a change of personnel at the prize-giving.

India will surely brew a clutch of world-level players, within the next couple of years. They have to – not just to justify *that monster investment* but to claw their way past England and up to Australia’s higher stratum. In Thakur they may have the finest and most skilfull quick on the planet, but Sharma/Vastrakar/Pandey too frequently present as passable international bowlers rather than worldies. And batting-wise, if Mandhana and Verma don’t fire, up top, there is too often that sense of drift or diminishing dynamism through the order. The WPL – & the belated support and acknowledgement of the women’s game, from India/Indian corporations/Indian blokes at largehas changed things. Values. There should now be a full-on production-line of well-trained professional athletes, equipped to thrive in the New Era of heightened expectation and exposure. Aus, look out!


Wyatt dabs and fails. The excellent Thukar, a rising star of the world game – rising, that is, with India, who are surely finally gearing up to *actually challenge* Aus and England? – slaps one in on a decent length and the England opener, in trying to open the blade and ease to third (man?), misjudges. Barely gets a tickle and the keeper can dive to her right to pouch. 1 for 1 and the slow walk back.

The fabulous Capsey follows shortly, beaten rather too easily by another goodish ball from the same bowler. ‘Playing across’ as the Old Guys might say. Sciver-Brunt is in, at bugger all for 2. A fine start for Thakur and her team, undermined a tad by a shocking review for a ball missing leg stump by nine inches-plus. Whatever; India are over the parrot, at 14 for 2 after 3 overs. The ball is both swinging and seaming, too.

Vastrakar bowls the fourth. Good athlete. Dunkley slashes at an outswinger with some width and is maybe a little fortunate to hoist safely to third. Nat Sciver-Brunt treats the bowler with some contempt, gliding her over the leg slip area, middling her scoop.

Thakur – an obvious threat, here – will bowl her third consecutive over. She castles Dunkley. Again the ball does a bit but the batter looked even more unwieldy than usual, through the shot. (Weird, given she ultimately looked to play straight: she was reaching and feet were blocked). Real trouble as Knight joins, on 29 for 3. Thakur nearly does her, first-up, with a cute slower ball.

Deepti Sharma will bring her finger-spin… and her deliberately irritating habit of abandoning deliveries. But she has Knight concerned about a review, for a sweep which ultimately was judged to have flicked glove: minimally, it has to be said. N S-B has gone to 16 off 11 balls, as her partner grabs a boundary. The sense that this is the game may be premature but plainly these two batters really are worldies who may represent England’s best chance of building a genuinely competitive total.

Gayakwad brings some slow left arm. Knight crunches her for four, with a crisp reverse-sweep. There is help here for the bowlers but both batters are looking good. The skipper doubles up on the boundaries, clattering a poorish, shortish ball to leg. England are recovering – impressively so. 61 for 3 after 9.

More changes; Verma, drifting one wide outside off but N S-B, already committed to a heave to leg, does just that. Even easier pickings soon come: a full-bunger dispatched. 11 from the over. Pandey will hope to do better. As they reach the 50 partnership (and I am again about to put on the record that Heather Knight and Nat Sciver-Brunt are both bloody brilliant) Knight errs. Kinda from nowhere: caught and gone, mistiming to mid-off, the bowler almost embarrassed. Could be huge.

I may written more contentiously (and maybe just more words?) about Amy Jones than any other cricketer on the planet. She is potentially dynamic and fluent… but faaaaar toooo often she bombs out – and *the feeling i*s this happens most frequently when the pressure is on. She looks watchful (to say the least): can’t get Pandey away. England are 86 for 4 after 13.

India again fail the Realistic Review test, checking on a stumping that, yaknow, just wasn’t. (Seriously, they will need to work on this: have no doubt they will, or are). Games may depend upon it, and currently their enquiries are consistently wild.

100 up, with N S-B on 47 from 35 and Jones 10 off 12. Vastrakar bounces the latter. Jones responds by belting her a million miles for a shockingly emphatic six. (She can do this; always been a ver-ry pure hitter. More please, Amy).

The run rate is a touch below 7. These two will naturally look to take fifty-odd off the last five overs: if they do, the total will be towards 160. That would be a strongish return from where England were… and in an environment where the bowlers should go well, it should be competitive.

Deepti Sharma is bowling wide to off, in the 17th over. N S-B takes her half-century, before painfully offering catching practice to short third. (It was a slow-motion reverse, marginally miscued, that dollied to the fielder). Real shame – and potentially important, should Ecclestone fail to fire and the run rate drop away.

Jones, to her credit, has risen to the challenge. She is 29 off 20. Sharma gets clattered for two further sixes. Thakur – the best bowler we’ve seen, by a distance – will bowl out, with England approaching 150. Jones tries to invent something but can only dink tamely to the keeper.

K Sciver-Brunt is in with two balls remaining. She clumps straight to long on, giving Thakur her 5-fer. 147 for 7 as Glenn marches out to face. The final ball beats everyone for pace… but runs away for four byes. 151 the total: ‘something’, for sure, but less than England would have hoped for – the curse of wickets falling. Could be fabulous and fascinating, mind, with both Brunts and England’s strong spin attack likely to tease the Indian batting line-up.

The truly magnificent K B-S bangs ‘e m in hard, in the first over. 70 mph. Smriti Mandhana and Verma come through; four from it. Bell will bowl the second. Marginal, swinging wide – to leg. (She does have a ravishing inswinger). Nasser on comms is right, however, to note her relative inconsistency. The bowler, fearing further wides(?) stays too far out there and Verma can glide her away with some comfort – the first boundary. Neither bowler has quite found it: India are 11 for 0 after 2.

Brunt – not known for her quiet magnanimity – is bawling to the gods. She’s been biffed to the boundary four times, on her second visit. As always, Hussein calls it out: poor bowling strategy, never mind poor bowling. England have been short and often wide, on a day when the ball is working for them through the air and off the pitch. Rubbish thinking and/or execution. Bell returns, with reputation(s) to restore.

Tough chance, perhaps, but a beauty of a slower delivery from Bell is flying to Dean’s left. She dives but fails to claim. Late in the over, Verma offers again. This time K S-B can’t help but hold on. England barely deserve the breakthrough. Can it be the start of something? Dean will bowl the fifth.

Mandhana greets her with a straight on-drive; ambitious and aerial but safe. Four. Rodrigues has joined her skipper. Awful wide, from Dean. I reckon that’s five straight, mixed overs, from England. 36 for 1, India. Bell starts with another wide – to off. (Coach and bowling coach have just left the country).

Ecclestone. On the button and getting turn. (Alleyloo). Just the 3 from the over. Then Glenn. Dunkley fluffs a chance, mid-over, then Dean slaps it back from the boundary – the Ugly and the Good. Mandhana is 30, Rodrigues ambling on 7; India 50 for 1 after 8. However, almost imperceptibly, the run rate is drifting towards England. 95 needed off 66 balls. And you feel there will be wickets. (*Fatal).

Glenn will bowl the 10th. She gets a strangely ‘regulation’ wicket, as Rodrigues – experienced international and something of a short-format specialist – bunts straight to Kath S-B at long on. Momentum-shift? Maybe not, when we consider that the incoming bat is Harmanpreet Kaur. This is the Knight/N S-B partnership-equivalent: two goddesses. 62 for 2 at the halfway point.

MOMENT. Kaur slashes rather lazily at Ecclestone, given the spin available and evident, and lifts it exactly where Capsey is loitering – in the off-side ring. The England starlet almost does the horlicks horror-thing… but no. Gone. Presenting us with a likelihood, now, that England, who have almost been rubbish, may win this. Enter Natalie Sciver-Brunt.

That sense is both reinforced and contradicted, when two fielding errors – the latter a howler by Capsey – offer runs. 75 for 3, after 12. Reminder; target 152.

Smriti M creams one from Dean through mid-off. Four. Then goes over the same area. Good over for India. Glenn returns and starts again with a beaut, to pin Richa back in her crease. Three great balls in succession; something of a rarity in the innings. Then Brunt senior – if I may call her that? -pulls off an outstanding diving stop at the rope. Better competitive energy from all parties.

Ecclestone. Ragging it, by her standards. Draws an error but the ball lands safe. But rain. More miscues… but again Mandhana clears the circle. 15 done and India are 93 for 3. Need to go big quickly.

Conditions may be a factor, now. Dean may have misjudged the flight of a half-chance but hard to tell. No arguments with the blow that takes Mandhana to a fine fifty, though. Middles and nearly claims the six. But next ball, she’s gone. Glenn the bowler, N S-B the fielder catching in front of her chest. HUGE. 105 FOR 4. Two a ball needed, with Deepti joining.

Nat Sciver-Brunt beats her all ends up, twice, before she finally manages to cuff away to third. Good, skilfull over from the bowler. Can Bell follow and reciprocate?

She bowls an extravagant (but solid) back-of-the-hand delivery which Deepti clumps to off, for two. Then another peach which draws an airshot. Richa *really collects* one over long-on: it’s a decent ball which goes for six. Shit happens. Good over, from Bell. 118 for 4, meaning 32 need from 12. Ecclestone.

Deepti is LBW, but not. Clearly struck glove/bat. Ecclestone knew and the umpire has to accept her error. India have to scramble and they are. Racing in vain for two, Deepti Sharma is well short. Notably smart work in the field, from N S-B. She is amongst the best at everything she does. It’s maybe only now that England look organised and proficient. Ecclestone was miserly and threatening. Bell did well, at the death. Now India need 31 from the last over, which will be bowled by K S-B.

She starts with an awful, wide full-toss. Then one which is worse… and a no-ball, for height. Extraordinary. Richa Gosh has 38 and has the ‘all donations kindly received’ sign out. But she can only club the next for one. So 20 off 3 needed. Then, incredibly, 14 from 2, as K S-B plops one right in the slot and is punished for six runs. The bowler is angry and somewhat humiliated but moments later England are home, winning by 11 runs.

An oddity. They’ve been somewhere between lousy and mixed: Australia might even be giggling. Only Natalie Sciver-Brunt and Amy Jones spring to mind as folks who can be satisfied with their contributions. (O-kaaay, and Ecclestone). Yup, conditions were helpful to the bowling attacks, but Wyatt, Dunkley and Capsey were faaar too easily undone. And too much of the bowling was slack or ill-thought-out. A five out of ten performance, from England. Fielding was ordinary. Batting only convincing when Knight and Nat S-B found a rhythm and began to dictate. And yet the league table says…

India calling. Loudly.

So cricket then. And women. Women finally getting Kraazy Kapitalism’s blessing, in the form of lorryloads of lakh. The blessing and the obscenity that is an explosion of crore… and all the game-changing and life-changing stuff around that.

India – all-powerful in those fuggy committee rooms – has pressed ‘detonate’. The neon, the napalm, the jazzed-up slave-market bidding-war boogaboog is ON. The Frenzy has leaked across to the Women’s Game. Shafali Verma can buy Guadeloupe. Nat Sciver can buy Andorra. Ebs is out of retirement. March.

Of course much of this is wonderful. Elite cricket for women has been surging for years, ahead of  the typically tepid investment, (but) most obviously/and/or pretty much exclusively in Australia and England. Even India, until very recently, has felt adrift, as though unable to cut through the raw sexism and superannuated conservatism of The Authorities. Outside of those Big Three, the environment, resources and playing standards may have been building, in some cases nobly or thrillingly, but flickering; developments of every sort were stymied by a lack of support.

Often this felt willful; that is, a ‘natural extension’ of #everydaysexism. Despite it being common knowledge in Cricket Development (and beyond!) that the female universe was ABSOLUTELY THE PLACE for growth and investment, *somehow* this rarely translated into anything approaching equity, in terms of opportunity, pathway progression or a viable career. (Plainly this is still the case, in many ‘cricket-playing countries’).

It’s got better. Australia have led the way, ‘morally’, strategically and in respect of playing standards. England have followed. Now the TV-sales-rights-thing for the Women’s Premier League – in India, yes? – plus the cost of the *actual teams* means there is a previously unthinkably Giant Wedge allocated towards the game.

Interestingly, I note that Arjun Sengupta in the Indian Express is reporting that because the WPL salary cap is relatively low – at Rs 12 crore – the players, despite obviously getting waaaay more than they are used to, will get a smallish percentage of the revenue accrued. This is not necessarily a male/female issue: the IPL players – that is, the blokes, salary cap 95 crores – are believed to receive about 22% of the overall revenue. For comparison, NBL stars get 50%, NFL players 48% and god knows what Premier League footballers get, because there is no wage cap in the Beautiful Game.

In short, cricket, quite possibly because there are effectively no unions – or no effective unions? – underpays generally, compared to other leading sports. I wonder how long this will continue?

 *Puts call in, to Mick Lynch*.

But back to the clear positives. This is a massive incentive for women’s cricket. It’s historic. It’s a statement from which huge philosophical and political developments might spring. The value of things has shifted. Possibilities have opened up, in and beyond what happens on the pitch.

I imagine the likes of Heather Knight (hopefully) and Danni Wyatt and Issy Wong (certainly), will be tingling at the financial implications, feeling somewhat suddenly blessed *and yet* bearing some awareness of the responsibilities ahead. They may well still be trailblazers, of a sort – women exposed to a higher peak, a lusher, wider, more colorific screen. Let’s hope they enjoy it in every sense.

                                                                           *

That whole concept of ‘deserving’ is a conflicted, spurious beast, eh? But Knight has been a genuinely brilliant (England) captain and player for a decade or more. Wyatt similar. These women have been driving and ‘starring’ for their regional or international teams without, frankly, much reward or much of an audience as their cricket transitioned painfully slowly towards Real Professionalism. That may be changing – has changed – but of course it’s the New Generation – the Capseys, the Wongs, the Bells, the Charlie Deans – who will be alighting into this transformed landscape.

(If selected), I’m pretty sure they will be thinking of Brunt, Shrubsole, Sarah Taylor and the like, as they run out into the roar, at Bengaluru. For them – and for the wider women’s game – there will surely be a palpable sense of arrival?

                                                                                *

But where does this leave a) red-ball cricket… and b) the international game?

We can’t pretend there will be no implications.

In truth, we don’t know yet, whether the lurch towards Big Money Tournaments and their expansion around the globe will shred traditional formats. Plenty fear that.

Plenty of players talk a good game about recognizing Test Cricket as ‘the pinnacle’ but it’s not just an increasingly rammed schedule that seems likely to complicate matters here. Money chunters loudly, and whether we choose to couch that as players ‘seeking security’ or players being greedy or disloyal matters little to the net effect. Player A – who can get a gig in two or three out of the IPL/Big Bash/Hundred/the new South African Wotsit – may not need to even contemplate either any longer format cricket or the international game. At all. You might need a County or Regional Side of some sort to kick-start your career but… after that? P’raps not.

The raw truth of it is that as of NOW, professional cricket players (at the elite level) can choose to make a good living by hot-footing around the New Events. Most will know they can make a whole lot more moolah as a ‘hired gun’ than as ‘an honest County pro’ at Leicester or Glammy.

Culture and tradition can either be vital, or completely bypassed. There are New Choices. Doesn’t matter if I (for example) *kinda rate* the IPL but never watch it – and don’t, for tribal reasons, give a toss for Rajasthan Whatevers – because (for example) my son’s all over it. It’s MASSIVE. So the Very Best Short Format Players can feast on it, without me, or you, or what we might call the traditional audience. Their choice – and no problem.

It barely matters that the various other monster gigs are currently lower-profile than the IPL/WPL. They’re still big enough. They compensate well. The number of options (for explosive/dynamic types) is increasing. So this moment of incredi-boom is become, also, a moment of existential crises: what is right? What is sustainable? Are there not – yaknow – too many? How the hell do we manage this?

                                                                               *

Test Cricket takes time. It takes a particular kind of preparation. It implies a particular kind of understanding and investment (not necessarily financial, but that, too) from supporter… and governing body… and player. Can Test Cricket be, or where can it be, amidst the New Schedule? And who gets to design that schedule? What freedoms or responsibilities or contracts will players typically have? Utterly individual, to accommodate everything? And what about four day cricket? Will the Hundred kill off County Cricket – was it covertly designed to? If you’re not a Hundred venue, how do you recruit players/stay afloat, when the circus calls ever more loudly and more often?

Ultimately, how many players will want to be County Cricketers, or even England cricketers, if Route A to security/fame/glory/razzamatazz is making that inessential… or possibly irrelevant? How many are better-suited, in every way, to gallivanting and booming?

I love that Sophie Ecclestone is going to be rich. She’s a fabulous, hard-working cricketer. It’s wonderful, but not straightforward, that the universe may be offering playing opportunities denied to Ebony R-B, Isa Guha or even Katherine Brunt. Whilst it feels overwhelming likely that Ecclestone (and her rough-equivalent megastar, Buttler) wants to and will continue to play for England, extravagant new choices are emerging. And where you have choices… and Big Decisions… you have consequences.

Special.

Go elsewhere for the 5 Moments of Greatest Garethness or the 5 Whitchurch Women Who Withered, Unwanted. For the goss and the factoids, go elsewhere. We’re gonna talk about poetry. Bale the Blistering Wingman of Doom; Bale the Arch-archer of Dead-Ball Wizardry. Gareth the Flier and Gossamer Druid.

He raced in to our lives and lifted the sport and the bloody, blood-red country. More direct, more threatening and winningly more committed to the cause than Giggs, Bale really did seem to ooze Welshness; it was inseparable from his outsize talent, bleeding across a series of developing Red Armies until a Qatar seemed inevitable. And he did it all crocked.

Isolate a few goals – haring down the wing for Tottenham/clubbing obscenely overhead, for Real – and you may have the sense of the generationally-spectacular talent: but there will always be a tension in the wider world around the Bale Enigma thing. By its nature it’s probably unresolvable but that won’t stop the lads on TalkBollocksFM blathering, between farts…

  • How crocked was he, for how long?
  • When did he know he would have to ‘manage his way’ through?
  • (Or) was he just one of those blokes with a lowish pain-threshold?

Not sure many Wales fans were asking or will ask these questions but…

  • Why did the Real die-hards hate him – did he really spend most of his life on the golf course?
  • Was he really such an Ex-Pat Air-head that he failed, over all that time, to join in?

Minor fascinations for some. Much of the evidence for his relationships with colleagues points to a good, funny, humble bloke. So an admittedly weird mix of convivial laddishness and excommunication. It’s feasible Bale was both chirpy and ‘quiet’. Certainly he was a low-octane captain for his country, sure enough or quiet enough to single out his moments of import or intervention *at interval*. Meaning he neither blazed nor bawled: he was a god of stealth and inspiration.

Wales has felt blessed to carry him and Bale, wonderfully, has deeply understood and reciprocated. He’s poured what he had back into the surge towards legitimacy. For aeons, the national side simply had no players, or so few that even the crackle and hwyl of their honesty and pride would not, could not get them to the tournaments that mattered. Not quite. Then Bale and Ramsey found themselves amongst a matrix of goodish, competitive individuals. Yes they still had to punch above but the squad could hold their own… and wait for one of those moments.

Gareth Bale provided and kept on doing it. ‘Til the good folks of Abertillery and Aberaeron could finally stop talking about ’58.

If we say little about Qatar it’s because Wales plainly underperformed. The skipper himself was peripheral; unable to string things together, never mind electrify the campaign in the way he and His Country had hoped. But Gareth Bale had already passed into legend – in that sense his work was done. He was bard-like, he was totemic, he was a real Prince of the People already.

Some of us said (and wrote), immediately after the tournament exit that the lad from Whitchurch Comp should call it a day – that it was right and that he deserved to stop. Enough of that nursing.

Feels good that he’s listened. He’s been special.

sportslaureate.co.uk 2022 Review.

Wow. Best part of 30 posts, on the site and all but four on cricket. I suppose that’s the legacy of a worldview targeting my former Cricket Man audience. (For newbies, I was @cricketmanwales and cricketmanwales.com for some years, before I decided to freshen this baybee up and use the sportslaureate appendage. I am still proud to work on the Cricket Wales Pathway, as a coach, but may be preparing the ground – honestly dunno – for a combination-thing with bowlingatvincent.com sometime in the future). Anyways. Twenty posts on women’s cricket: perversely proud of that.

Let’s blaze through the oddities. Two posts on important, interesting and influential cricket books – ‘Hitting Against the Spin’ and ‘Different Class’. (Buy and read: simple). The annual (blokes’) Finals Day pilgrimage. An appreciation of Phil Bennett. And four posts on England in Qatar and one on Lionesses v Sweden.

The year started, perhaps appropriately, with something on Bairstow:

Is there also a sense that, being drawn to drama, Bairstow’s juices simply don’t always flow? That he responds to situations which demand heroics? Despite being plainly a mentally and physically tough guy, his contributions seem fickle – less reliable than his personality and grit and gifts would suggest.

If we squint at the notion of the Year As A Whole, somehow Jonny B has retreated into the steamy-glorious wake of Stokes and McCullum.. but this absolute Yorkie, this ‘broad, bellowing, beautiful battler‘ owned, or should own a powerful chunk of our sporting memories.

Because of my traditional support of women’s international cricket, the Hand Grenade of Lurv that Stokes and McCullum have rolled under Test Cricket is woefully under-represented. In Worthy Winners, (December), I do finally capture something of the generosity and yes, wonder implicit in England’s lurch towards fearlessness and out-living.

I may need a month away somewhere exotic, or a pint of poteen, or a long, deep sleep. To find the words, the New Superlatives. But there’s that over-riding urge, is there not, to record it now – the thrill, the love, the stand-up-and-raise-the-rafters-ness? Stokes. Anderson. Robinson. Bazza. And a Great Moment in Sport.

This was Rawalpindi but it could have been every time England stepped on the park. It was a travesty of some magnitude that Stokes didn’t gather-in the BBC’s Sports Personality of the Year Award: he certainly gets mine.

My broad choice to deliberately shun men’s cricket in favour of Knight, Sciver and co weakened at two further points. I was there, in Bristol, when things got ‘obscene’ to the tune of 234 in twenty overs and wrote on arguably the sporting performance of the year, when Buttler and Hales carted India into history, in that World Cup semi.

At Gloucester County Cricket Club – or whatever we’re supposed to call it – I went live, as per, as England went ballistic. (Brizzle again. With the blokes – July). But looking back I find I still found the moment to *comment more widely*…

To my right, the recently-retired-into-a-job-on-telly Eoin Morgan, in a very Eoin Morgan jumper – beige/faun, v-neck, politely inoffensive – is with the A-listers Butcher and Ward. Doing his Mr Clean-but-bright thing. No sound on our monitor so can only imagine the chat is high level; usually is with those gents. Life been busy so banging in the coffees. 18.18.

I was working when Buttler and Hales did their utterly remarkable job on India, but scuttled back to – theoretically at least – offer reasoned and informed views. (Can’t wait. November).

About noon. Seen six minutes of highlights so this qualifies me. I can blast away, like Hales and Buttler, confident in the knowledge that my opining is shining and query-proof. Especially as you lot can’t be arsed (allegedly) to think beyond counter-bawls, which don’t count, or only count on the Twitters.

Glad I subconsciously cross-referenced (that’s a thing, right?) the Hales-Morgan divide, during these streams of erm, reportage.

But The Women.

Have moaned a little, over the years, about the lack of support and appreciation for women’s sport generally, and particularly within the field I choose to follow. The BIGGEST, MOST WUNNERFUL THING, in 2022, is/was, of course, the now undeniable surge in quality/exposure and therefore support for female sport. Think England Lionesses – but also the stunning improvements in the WSL – and think cricket.

Australia are streets ahead, still, but England are and have been for some time the #bestteamintheworldthatisntAustralia. For me the Hundred has been only a bit-player in this – but I’m not going to get drawn into that, for now. The ginormous and healthy and fabulously watchable upswing in women’s elite and international cricket has been building relatively unseen, for years but finally, despite continuing, glaring omissions, is (relatively), crucially visible. Folks can see that Wong is a thriller and that Ecclestone a genuine worldie.

The noble (and prickly, and fire-breathing) work of Brunt has earned this. (Not just her, plainly, but Brunty is my Goddess of Wall-dismantleage). Skills and agility and power and pace and inge-bloody-nuity have boomed. Despite poorish crowds and poorish money. Heather Knight has grown from Arch-typically Doughty England Skipper into a great, consistent, sometimes expansive bat. It’s worth paying the entry money to see Villiers throw.

I went to the single Test, in Taunton. (Eng SA, July). It was rain-affected but it mattered. For one thing this is a matter of respect (yes?) For another, as England enter the post Brunt & Shrubsole era, the universe is calling for bonafide, legitimate, ‘saleable’ stars.

Wong is bowling 70-plus. Legitimate bouncer. Then oooff. She bowls Wolvaardt – arguably South Africa’s key bat. Full and straight, didn’t appear do do a huge amount but clattered into the off-stump. Big Moment for Wong and for the game – she looks suitably pumped.

Issy Wong is ready – and more. She can carry the exposure, the hope, the drama. Wong is raw and waggish (in the good way): she’s a talent and a laff and she can hoop the ball around thrillingly. If the world needs fast bowlers (and my god it does!) and ‘characters’ (and my god it does!) Ms I.E.C.M. Wong is the dude. Or duchess. Or star we all need. Seriously; the emergence of Wong/Bell/Capsey to bolster the boostage is important, gratifying, necessary, good. It’s one of many reasons to get into women’s cricket right now.

(Decider: Eng v India, July).

Wong will want a share of this. She looks determined to the point of mild anger. She bowls 69mph, then slaps in a bouncer which Rana can only smile thinly at.

(Spoiler alert: Eng smash the mighty continent, to confirm their clear second place, behind Mighty Oz).

Big Picture. I’ve been saying for years that India are under-achieving, largely because they have remained significantly behind their hosts, tonight. Given the resources theoretically available to the mighty continent, they have been persistently less professional, less convincing and less dynamic than Liccle Ingerland.

There are lots of words about Eng women. Only about half a dozen of us have consistently followed and reported their action. Go read. Then watch them on’t tellybox and go watch them live. It’s lovely.

In November I got into the football, thrashing wildly at the Meaning of Qatar, in Swallow.

We had Russia and now we have Qatar. Both monsters

I was particularly offended by the fans buyout – i.e. the bribing of the England Band and a clutch of Wales fans, by the Qatari regime. It was like a profoundly appropriate symbol for Trump/Putin/Johnson era shithousery. Magnificently, shamelessly appalling in the manner of the political/philosophical moment: diabolically ‘2022’.

The England Band buy-out is almost funny. Except that I think we should find them, slam them in stocks at St George’s Park and lustily launch any available rotting fruit (and maybe orange paint). Fellas, you might think you are being cute, merely extending the repertoire of your slightly middle-class playfulness, but no. You are t**ts of a very high order. Shameless, brainless, conscienceless t**ts. Same for you taffs.

I also *had words* about Southgate, particularly contrasting his honourable conservatism with the liberating, intuitive McCullum/Stokes axis. This felt a BIG DIFFERENCE.

Bazball is predicated on a hearty kind of fearlessness – but one which *dares* and attacks. Southgate, in my view, is incapable of that – and yes, that does diminish him. I repeat my admiration for the England football gaffer as a man of integrity and political/cultural significance. I also note that my/our criticism of him is absolutely not borne of English exceptionalist entitlement (and therefore delusion). Southgate is a man of caution. He’s not a great coach.

Southgate couldn’t pick Rashford, to race and dazzle, against France. Because despite the United man being plainly on fire, his edgy lack of proportion and reliability – his immediate force, in other words – didn’t fit with Southgate’s measured way. This, for me, was obviously erroneous and yet classic Sir Gareth.

But we can’t finish on either this marginal narrowness, or with the wider, surreal nihilism or negativity of the political milieu, 2022-style. Not when most of The Writing here is essentially an act of protest. In a few words, 2022 was brilliant when we think of…

Women’s sport finally coming into focus – and our livingrooms. Levels of quality soaring.

Stokes, McCullum.

Wong/Bell/Cross – particularly Cross, who is a favourite (and I can’t explain that) – running in, carrying our hopes.

Friends, I have no idea if I can sustain my travelling and ridicu-‘reporting’, into 2023. But I may. Thankyou for your support: please do read/follow/re-tweet – all that bollocks is helpful. Remember my political wing is over on bowlingatvincent.com

Happy New Year to all.

Rick.

Twittering on #England.

Thought this *many times* so adding it, belatedly. Why have none of us contrasted the admittedly macho, but essentially generous liberation of Brendon McCullum & Ben Stokes, with the clear (on-the-park) conservatism of Southgate? Bazball is predicated on a hearty kind of fearlessness – but one which *dares* and attacks. Southgate, in my view, is incapable of that – and yes, that does diminish him. I repeat my admiration for the England football gaffer as a man of integrity and political/cultural significance. I also note that my/our criticism of him is absolutely not borne of English exceptionalist entitlement (and therefore delusion). Southgate is a man of caution. He’s not a great coach.

Anyway. Here’s my twitterblogthing, of yesterday… 👇🏻

What better way of recording the angst, the anger, the disappointment than by exposing it raw? And what’s more raw than The Twitters? So I’ve simply lifted my @sportslaureate feed from last night; in reverse order, with all the hashtags. (Blame the So-shull Meedya Expert who once told us Cricket Wales Peeps that it was ‘essential to bang at least three hashtags & three daft pics in there). It may be cobblers, but I find myself in the position where I am actively courting attention… on account of occasionally-depressingly-low numbers of readers.
Lols at the notion that this is going to fix that problem!

I stand by every word but concede that my frustration with Saka’s propensity to ‘draw fouls’ disproportionately obscured any credit to the player – who did well. However, he should have realised within about five minutes that this clown of a ref was rarely going to give ‘decisions’. My criticisms of Southgate are longstanding. His cultural/political excellence is beyond dispute but that don’t stick the ball in the onion-bag.

My criticisms of Henderson are neither partisan, nor personal. He just had one of those nights.
It took the fella half an hour to strike a clean pass. Everything was underhit, or struck with little confidence – he acknowledged this on more than one occasion, to an angry colleague. Given that he was Playmaker General, this did not augur well.

In short the gist of my arguments is that last night was classic Southgate in that he failed at every stage to go the positive route. Firstly, he chose not to recognise the obvious: that France are a fine side with an ordinary defence (and an iffy keeper). England started with six essentially defensive-minded players. Then, laughably, he not only failed to hoik Henderson at half-time, but chose to insert the marginally safer options (Mount and Sterling) ahead of the obvious threats, Rashford and Grealish. Pitifully weak and poor reading of the game – but very Southgate. Mount might score but he will offer you running cover: Sterling might do something and he is more experienced and has better percentages than Rashford. Woeful and negative on every count.

But I’m ranting. Here’s chapter and verse, Twitter-style. Last tweet first.
Feel free to disagree – but you’d be wrong. 🤣 ⚽️ 🙏🏼

Wow. Lots of people not watching the same game as me. 🤯

Will be up early to watch #cricket. May write about the #football then… or may just say ‘go read my tweets!’ 🤣

Good luck to #Fra , btw. Ordinary tonight but generally better than #Eng . Expected les Bleus to win the tournament: feels likelier, now.

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

Poor game, poorly refereed. #Southgate culpable, as so often, for conservative selection & mistrust of game-changers & ‘talents’. No meaningful role for #Rashford or #Grealish. #Foden peripheral.

The guy’s a good man but an ordinary manager.

#Eng  #Fra 

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

Incredible penalty, from #Kane. 🤣Refer back to my Forest v Derby tweet!

Ref’s an idiot. Clear pen against #Mount. #VAR sorts it – unusually, in this tournament.

#Eng  #Fra 

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

#Eng central defence: is there one? 🤯 👀 ⚽️
Laughable space, repeatedly. Then #Giroud punishes #Maguire’s inattention.

#Fra 

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

Classic #Southgate, to go for #Mount, instead of the Luxury Player, #Grealish? 🤨

#Eng  #Fra  ⚽️

#QatarWorldCup2022 #FIFAWorldCup 

#conservatives 🤓

#Eng now ahead on points. 🤓
Who knew that URGENCY mattered? 🤷🏻‍♂️

#Fra 

#QatarWorldCup2022 #FIFAWorldCup  ⚽️

Inflammatory cobblers 4.
Standard-wise, it’s FA Cup, 3rd round, Forest v Derby, yes? 🤷🏻‍♂️

#Eng  #Fra  👀

#QatarWorldCup2022 #FIFAWorldCup  ⚽️

#Saka draws one. It’s probably kosher but mildly irritating that he sees his primary objective as drawing pens, not lashing the ball into the net.

#Kane scores. Perhaps reward for an up-tick in the energy from his side? 1-1.

#Eng  #Fra 

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

So why is #Henderson – slowish, unlikely to score – the one charging at the keeper or centre-backs, when #Fra  pass back?

#Eng  #Fra 

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

#Southgate may may missed this but it’s widely known that #Fra  (relative) area of weakness is their defence…

#Eng 

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

Half-time. It’s been poor entertainment & generally low-quality. #Henderson must surely get hoiked. #Eng  need a creative, confident playmaker. It’s so pedestrian atm even #Bellingham & #Foden look ordinary. #Fra  have forward gears in reserve: maybe Eng do, too?

#Qatar2022 

33 mins. #Bellingham ordinary/poor, so far. #Saka too interested in drawing fouls – & it’s working against him, with the ref. #Eng  looking (largely) like a limited, conservative, pedestrian side. #Fra  just livelier.

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup  ⚽️

#analysis 🤓

#Henderson relentlessly woeful. Case for hoiking him.

#Eng  #Fra 

#Qatar #FIFAWorldCup 

Ver-ry clumsy challenge. #Kane inevitably looking to draw something… but that WAS clumsy. #Eng  don’t get the pen.

#QatarWorldCup2022 #FIFAWorldCup 

22 mins. #Henderson yet to hit a firm, committed pass. But some signs #Eng  are settling.

#Eng  #Fra 

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

Great strike. #Fra  looking better, now they have the lead.

#Saka WAS fouled (but not strong enough) prior to the break but FRANCE LOOKING BETTER. 1-0.

Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

#Shaw dives in & then #Giroud has space for the header, 8 yards out? 👀 🤯 Poor.

#Eng  #Fra 

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup  ⚽️

Unbelievable that #Maguire should be offside for that early free-kick. 🤷🏻‍♂️

#Eng  #Fra  #Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

How can the ball not be suitable for play? 🤣 ⚽️ 🤷🏻‍♂️

#Eng  #Fra 

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

Inflammatory cobblers 3. I don’t mind if this is ‘cagey’ – expect that – as long as its high quality cagey. 🤓

#Eng  #Fra 

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

Inflammatory cobblers 2. The #Eng  national anthem is ridiculous & waaaay beyond its sell-by-date.

#Fra 

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

Inflammatory cobblers 1. #Lloris is poor. 👎🏻 👀

#Eng  #Fra  ⚽️

#Qatar2022  #FIFAWorldCup 

‘Worthy Winners’.

I may need a month away somewhere exotic, or a pint of poteen, or a long, deep sleep. To find the words, the New Superlatives. But there’s that over-riding urge, is there not, to record it now – the thrill, the love, the stand-up-and-raise-the-rafters-ness? Stokes. Anderson. Robinson. Bazza. And a Great Moment in Sport.

Almost obscured by that other, obscene giant, flashing it’s gaudy wares at us from the fucking desert, we find, we stumble-upon Another England playing with the kind of absurd generosity that Southgate could never even contemplate: Brendon McCullum and Ben Stokes engineering a thrilling contest from a ‘feather bed’, an unforgiving ‘road’, a ‘dustbowl’. Because why not, why wouldn’t you, if you really understand what sport is, or what it can aspire towards?

A final day at Rawalpindi that owed everything to the very rarest combination of ambition for the whole game, as opposed to just the win; thereby re-affirming something a whole lot simpler and purer than some spurious Spirit of Cricket. Yes, McCullum’s blokey machismo may be flawed or even questionable, *on times*… but no, today is not one of those times. Today is a day to savour the life-affirming brilliance of his statement of faith and the new, joyful supremacy of a timeless idea: to enact that inviolable connection between responsibility and execution.

Bazza believes there is a Right Way and that confidence and liberation can take us there. In the wider context of a sport in some turmoil and under some threat – chiefly due to diabolical and generally avaricious government – This England are bypassing all that selfish ‘radical’ market-conservatism. This England are world-leaders in challenging.

Maybe the details don’t matter (but that declaration, tho’?)

Offering 343 with ridicu-lumps of time left? Nobody does that, in this situation, on that road. Nobody. Stokes did, because it was right and it made the game. Then that old bloke who can only bowl in the gloom at Trent Bridge does his thing and Stokes himself finds some truly fabulous leg-cutters and fatty Robinson finds some reverse and waddyaknow? Despite bumps in that road – howlers plural, from Pope, behind the sticks and gritty defiance from the last pair – the four-eyed slap’ead (who can’t turn it) claims the final wicket in a win that might need those aforementioned New Superlatives. England win a stone-dead test.

It was a privilege for those us who were able to watch the final day play out – even if just on the tellybox. The boldness was already fixed in but the bowlers needed to find spirit and guts as well as a disciplined line and length. Allegedly the pitch was going to offer nothing. Allegedly reverse might… but its influence on the game had been relatively minimal so far. Stokes opted to go all-in on the aggressive field-placements – he had to, right, to execute the unlikely win? – and press the Superhuman button again, again. The fella’s almost certainly in some discomfort but bowled a zillion overs of inventive, probing medium fast, endlessly beating the outside edge with leg-cutters/reversing outswingers.

Robinson, we hope, is on the proverbial journey towards better understandings around race and civility but the lad’s arrived as an international bowler. Some time ago, in fact. At a warmish ‘Pindi he found energy and threat for good periods: on times he even found some bounce. Anderson got his wily head on and bowled with shrewd, unshowy economy. It was an outstanding effort from an allegedly limited seam attack.

Spin-wise, there is a clear argument that Will Jacks is The Story: ‘Part-timer Gets Six On Debut’. But as time tightened and the drama focused, Stokes looked to Leach. After tea he bowled maidens just when they were needed. When Ali, in particular and Shah defied, at the death, he nailed the latter with a floaty, loopy one. The affectionate slaps to that pate told of the pleasure that final wicket gave to his comrades. Leach plainly contributes – perhaps more than those of us on the outside give him credit for.

This was all constructed upon the bulwark of big runs… and a spectacularly dynamic run-rate. So engineered from the off, by that culture of boldness. Stat-men and statesmen were no doubt consulted, pre- and post the toss: resolutions made, pictures painted. Last Day scenarios would have been mentally rehearsed from the moment Duckett and Crawley first went out to bat: An Approach agreed or reinforced.

Who cares, ultimately, where the percentages between laddish bravado and philosophical righteousness lie? Not me, not today. England were what we have so often called ‘worthy winners’ – they kinda defined that. The game won, too.

Pic from Sky Sports.

Qatar: #beyondsatire.

Wales have just dug out a draw against the States. But Wales do that, eh? Get outplayed and yet *find something*. And more often than not it’s the Golfing Enigma Himself, Mr G Bale Esq, who wields the silver spade. (Or o-kaay, wedge).

The other unfathomable truism – that the skipper and nonpareil would, according to custom, hardly have a meaningful touch, prior to the moment of godhood – also came to pass. The fella did nowt, before ju-ust easing his body across the defender’s incoming challenge, duly drawing enough, quasi-clumsy contact to force the decision. Bale was honestly largely ordinary (again)… but was the hero (again).

At the half, the Americans swaggered off, having delivered a consummate lesson. They were energetic, incisive and even stylish. Wales looked – or were made to look – deeply ordinary. Weah got the goal: there could have been more if the USA had found quality in the box to match the quality around the park. Players, fans and pundits of a celtic persuasion were longing for the break from about the twelfth minute, such was the mauling: *except*, of course, the second goal didn’t come… and there’s always Him.

The inevitable swap – Moore for James – changed things, as did the general lifting of the hwyl, from the Welsh. Now not only was there an outlet, there was possession and soon, hope. Who knows what Page and his staff said but within a few minutes the reds were ‘spiritually’ on the up and if not being thrillingly threatening, then at least bearing in on that US box. Extraordinarily, an equaliser felt likely.

The penalty came lateish, after a flurry or two from both sides which failed to produce the glaring opportunity to seal something. Moore should have scored with a header he simply met too hard: the USA raced in and around but rarely at Hennessey’s net. It was even, in short, in that second period. Until Gaz did his thing again.

The draw means Wales may need to be cheering the English, come Friday night. The USA may really test that Maguire/Stones combo if they show the flair and movement we saw here but Southgate’s team will be marginal favourites. Iran were so poor it’s hard to see them registering a point in the group but (with all due respect) it feels like Wales are least likely to rack up goals against them, or anyone else. Meaning the England/Wales fixture will be another one where the men in red may need to play above their capacity – and dig something out.

Here’s what happened earlier: England v Iran. And the socio-political *observations*.

Ok. It may be that a certain social medium is descending into the swamp from whence it came, only a deeper, probably more foul-smelling affair, if that’s at all possible. (A supra-Musky slew: that work?)

Maybe not, but of course in the month of #QatarWorldCup2022, sludge and slop of the moral/philosophical variety is gonna be inevitable, nevermind possible. But hey, lighten up! It may be that Infantino is to sport, to ‘gay’ness and to integrity what Elon bach is to civility, truth and Workers’ Rights. And it may be be that swamps are merging everywhere and the Orange Gibbon is back and Tesco Spicy Wedges have gone up 30p but… IT DOESN’T MATTER BECAUSE I WON TWITTER with my #beyondsatire!

*Just before* Qatar had the benefit of that deliciously mysterious off-side thang and waaaay before the ridiculous non-penalty for England after two blokes rugby-tackled Maguire and Stones, in plain sight, in the Iran box. In other words hand me the trophy and let’s be done with it. Nobody’s bothered, are they, about the actual football? And the actual football is as crassly-anarchic-in-a-bad-way as the whole god-damned concept, anyway, yeh?

EVERYTHING is #beyondsatire. Arid. The appalling, criminal indulgence and environmental disaster of it. The Fake Fans, Fake Football Culture; the half-time disappearing trick. The raw and obvious corruption. The gross incompetence as well as the world-level hypocrisy: even the legitimate stuff, the acceptable cultural differences like no beer (unless you have a monstrous wedge) have been handled with the sensitivity and intelligence of an Orange Gibbon. I was going to watch none of it. But then work was cancelled, so waddayadoo?

England started with impressively unconvincing ‘authority’, against an Iranian side who had boldly refrained from singing their national anthem. (They win my Actual Cup for this, on the assumption that it really was a united gesture against recent violence and oppression from their regime, but the gesture may have weighed so heavily that they could not slough away the fear – for themselves, for their families). Almost unthinkably, in terms of pure footie – yeh, I know! – Iran were almost certainly worse than Qatar.

Trippier and Saka could be weirdly displacing easy-peasy passes. Maguire and Stones could look cool-but-also-ready-to-spring-an ut-ter-howler. It didn’t matter. England didn’t need to find their flow – got nowhere near it – until their third goal went in. (And no I don’t care if that sounds daft: the performance was somehow a tad invertebrate, again and if I was Southgate I’d be having words about consistency and ‘bloody execution’, at the half: even three-nil up).

All the goals were good: Bellingham’s looping nod; Saka’s flush drive; Sterling’s sharp prod from Kane’s fabulous, whipped cross. But in every square yard of the pitch there seemed to be a bloke in red failing to do his job. England had space to play, time to play and – it very soon became obvious – little to fear. Southgate’s side, despite this open invitation to enjoy and express, were again that mixture of brightness and infuriatingly one-paced ‘approach play’. They approached mainly by polite request, written in triplicate. Maguire played some wonder-passes but together with Stones and Trippier he rarely stirred the action. Bellingham was looking silky as always but not much of consequence was being threaded into midfield and on from there: not snappily and smartly. Mount does all that but barely had an intervention. As a consequence, Iran could endure – were allowed to.

Even when the goals started to happen, English energy and concentration levels were mixed. Too many simple passes were missing their mark: only Kane seemed determined and able to make every contribution count. Overwhelmingly the possession of the pill was with the fellas in white. So where were Sterling and Mount, for half the match? Making quietly ineffective runs. Making quietly ineffective wall-passes backwards.

This may feel like it under-appreciates England, and the alleged complexities of international football. But I stick by it. Iran were miserable (I’m afraid) and it seems crazy that it wasn’t til the leggy dynamism of Rashford and the old-school centre-forwardism of Wilson was introduced that Southgate’s team roared again. The United striker grabbed a neat goal with his third touch and Grealish was gifted a tap-in by Wor Callum’s generous assist.

Saka’s game was encapsulated by his second goal; he ran forward with thinnish control and confidence, scuffed his shot but in it went. He was subbed and he will rightly play next time: but I hope somebody’s showing him video and stats around his contributions. Far too many are sloppy for a player of his qualities.

Iran scored two (somehow, late-on) but conceded six. Dreamland and yet not, for England. Stones hauling down his oppo to give away a pen may have felt wildly ironic, given the early ridicu-grapple-which-came-to-naught. But it was dumb… and the decision was right. Amongst his justifiably constructive appreciations for the fine goals and largely serene domination, Mr Southgate will be having words about that concession. The gaffer will know that drift and slackness will draw punishment.

Wales v USA is where this group starts. England, having plainly started well, need to extend beyond, prove they are better. Because they are.

Pic from BBC Sport.

Can’t wait.

About noon. Seen six minutes of highlights so this qualifies me. I can blast away, like Hales and Buttler, confident in the knowledge that my opining is shining and query-proof. Especially as you lot can’t be arsed (allegedly) to think beyond counter-bawls, which don’t count, or only count on the Twitters.

England smash – I said SMASH – India, in a remarkably one-sided semi that took expectation round the back there and gave it a damn good hiding.

After the bowlers had contained a medium-tepid Indian effort, the dreamy England skipper and his extravagantly-levered and levering compadre, Mr Hales, dismissed the much-vaunted Shami, Singh and co with a measure of contempt. Hales was again so shockingly brilliant that it is believed that Eoin Morgan has, in tribute, withdrawn his own membership of the Mild-Mannered Jacket-Wearing Crypto-Fascist War-on-Drugs Party and headed to the nearest tattoo parlour. Halesy is whatsapping over the wording any mo but it’s reported to be ‘recreational is cool, bro’, across the wingspan of a circling hawk.

Before I raced off to work – grimace emoji – I had heard England had chosen to field. I pushed it a little, then, to actually watch the first two overs, before booting off to enchant Year Six (x 2, local state school) with ‘balance and control challenges’ and the River Crossing game from #realPE. (Went great, thanks for asking. But, as per, I *really was* twitching the coaching antennae towards the activity in front: meaning I didn’t think about The Cricket ’til about 10.55… when an 11 am finish was confirmed as entirely viable. At which point I broke the land speed record – just joshing, occifer – between Neyland and Nolton Haven).

I HEARD, on the radio. Talksport. The news primer, at a handful of minutes after 11, was ‘that it’s all over, in Australia’. But did that mean good or bad news, for us Poms?

My first thought was ‘ah. Bugger’. Surely they would break this with a ‘fabulous England go through’ vibe, if they’d won? And bugger – “all over?” I’d imagined getting home for the last handful of overs. More headlines and more ads later they lead again with a rather understated “the World Cup Final will be Pakistan versus England”… and I throttle back, from the 78, to take that in. They’ve only gone and done it!

This is the harbinger of gleefully raised eyebrows but also existential crises about whether to divert, in my ecstasy-but-raging-hunger and gather-in a lamb and mint pasty and a hot chocolate – in short GO REALLY MAD – or drive on, towards yaknow – coverage. Mid-quandary, more info comes in: a TEN WICKET WIN. Hales and Buttler both 80-odd! Forgive me but there was now gleeful swearing in a “fuck-me-sideways” kindofaway, before I drove on.

Now I’m reflecting, whilst cruising through the Pembrokeshire lanes. Ten wickets. So Singh, Shami, Ashwin’ Kumar never got a sniff! Bloo-dee No-ra! Bet Hales was hauling them all over. OOOh, and whattabout a the final? Pakistan? Why is it I’m thinking most of England and Wales wants or wanted Pakistan to win it – or maybe the Kiwis? – if England (& Wales) don’t? Wossalldatabart? But who cares? Model final. Onwards: mind that bloody puddle, it’s about two feet deep.

I get back and check out brief, i-player highlights, after seeing the Sky Sports prog is back on at 3pm. And now I look at the scorecard.

I see Virat went well but that India trundled too long – nearer 6 an over than the 8-plus they surely needed – for extended periods. However well England bowled or however challenging the conditions might have been, that mindset felt too conservative. Batting first, against this England? Not enough; not enough intent, or gambling, or fearlessness. Some of that stuff… but not enough. Because you know even an England that’s not really convinced in the tournament will really go. They’ve brought in Salt, for Malan, which if anything is gonna raise the levels of violence. In this moment, this England is going to attack hard and sustain that onslaught. You – India – are going to have to think ten and over for lots of overs.

Just seen some comments from Moeen, on Rashid. Hope it’s true that he was brilliant again. Rate the thinking around having three very different spin options, in the England side. A rare, joyous luxury that two of them are potentially sensational, spirit-hiking, match-winning bats. (And Rashid has his moments of defiant excellence, too).

Have expressed some doubts, historically about Woakes and Jordan. Am genuinely an enormous fan of both, for their multifarious, legitimate skills but had/have a slight fear they may be relatively hittable, at the very highest levels of this format. Long may they prove me wrong. I repeat that I love Woakes’ all-round contribution and Jordan’s very real pace and unsurpassable fielding: just have a hunch that somebody may be able to really get hold of them, at a crucial time, when they have ball in hand.

‘Getting ahead’, this performance will and should make England favourites, if not bookies’ favourites, for the final. The universal presentiment will be that Buttler’s got his fellas peaking with spectacular timing. The balance and richness of the England side is beginning to look ‘destined’.

Without Topley and Wood, they are still bloody tasty, as the annihilation of India proves. We’ve long-known that Buttler himself is touched by something special. Many of us think his partner Hales may previously have been excluded for too long and out of some slightly weird, possibly cliquey conservatism as much as for ‘disciplinary reasons’. Now he’s here, doing what he’s done for aeons – smashing the best bowlers on the planet around, like they’re Under 13s.

Was going to rumble on about Curran and the benefits of having seven bowlers and eleven blokes who can all strike a ball, in the team. But superfluous. You will already be aware that my post-match analysis is as all-consumingly magnificent as England are, in flow.

Can’t wait to see the game.

Pic from Sky Sports.

Ok. Now watched extended highlights. Maybe I under-appreciated Kohli & Pandya’s aggression? But stand by that general accusation that India were too pedestrian (relatively, obvs) for too long. Were they over-confident or just a tad culturally cautious? Or nervous?!! Nasser, on comms, has just noted the disparity in their scoring rate for the first 12-15 overs and the last, exhilarating knockings.

The England reply started with 3 boundaries in the first over: Buttler making that mark. Onwards, then, to 33 for 0 after 3 and 63 without loss after 6 – at a time when Pandya and Kohli were extravagantly cajoling the crowd into distracting or intimidating the batters… because England were cruising.

Hales gets to his fifty off 28 balls. Buttler is similarly keen – it’s relentless, ten an over stuff. At times it feels like a piss-take: dancing and scooping or standing and clouting to short or long boundary. Harsha Bogle is in mild shock. One straight drive, hoisted off Shami by Buttler, registered heavily it seemed with the commentary team, the crowd, and the TV-watching zillions, like some notably awesome statement of superiority. And of course Buttler goes and finishes it with another rapturously sweet swing: six, over long on.

Done in 16 overs. 168 chased. Ten wicket win. India were 113 for 3 at the equivalent stage. Massacre, in terms of this format. Interesting to hear Buttler speak so articulately about the freedom that England’s endless batting line-up offers himself and Hales. They can go hard: they did.

Swallow.

Would like to write a furious, sweary and dangerously superior blog about the World Cup – the football one. Despite being neck-deep in the #T20WorldCup in Australia and increasingly captivated by the Women’s Rugby World Cup, New Zealand.

This in itself says something about football’s evil clout: it’s ability to swamp all known reason as well as the mere expedition of human activity. (Yup. All of it). Soccer is both the Beautiful Game and the Shit-vessel Supreme, especially the administration, the market side of it. Like one of those forest (and Forest People)-munching machines from Avatar, the game devours us; our ability to think, judge, act with any semblance of decency and intelligence being swept away in a roar of metal and sap.

A sociological (and therefore potentially wokeish) diversion. Could be that our propensity for tribal excitement leaves us particularly vulnerable to exploitation. In fact that would surely go out under ‘raging certainty’ on Bet365, or one of the other scavengers circling the soul of footie. The ‘bad side’ to visceral/communal joy is… it maybe dislodges other faculties. The thought striketh that governments and other makers of mischief may have cottoned-on, to this weakness.

We had Russia and now we have Qatar. Both monsters,* both benefiting from entirely predictable corruption, swilling through the posh hotels and swanky offices of the ‘football authorities’. A few voices were raised – indeed this post is a direct response to yet another magnificent and (in a good way) righteously challenging column from the Guardian’s Barney Ronay – but they/we (as we all know) will be drowned-out by the ubiquitous sludge that is PR/developing content/sportswashing. Those Who Govern feel like Untouchables because they are: money, influence and our feeble acquiescence will see them alright, and they know this.

Which brings me to two stories, from recent days. Most distressingly, the ‘fringe’ report that elements of state security in Qatar had drawn-in then shockingly violated gay men so as to send out a warning to World Cup visitors: ‘don’t you dare be who you are, on our territory’. Secondly, the widely-reported recruitment of the England Band and Welsh equivalent(ish) to a sort of metaphorical Qatari Cheerleaders Squad.

Go find the first story – there may be important updates. It’s appalling and it should be a game-changer (ironies alert!) in terms of how we all view the tournament. In short I think that if vindicated, it should prompt MASSIVE DISSENT and lurch us into significant boycott territory. (Personally, I think we should have steadfastly occupied that ground – i.e no f**king World Cup in Qatar, end-of – since day one).

The England Band buy-out is almost funny. Except that I think we should find them, slam them in stocks at St George’s Park and lustily launch any available rotting fruit (and maybe orange paint). Fellas, you might think you are being cute, merely extending the repertoire of your slightly middle-class playfulness, but no. You are t**ts of a very high order. Shameless, brainless, conscienceless t**ts. Same for you taffs.

Shame on you. Even if you try to subvert the Qatari bribe by effecting some miniscule ‘protest’, before being gathered in and having your temporary privileges withdrawn, shame on you. You have personally taken the sportswashing phenomenon to the next level; allowing a nation-state to shaft you, your integrity and the gullible universe in a spectacular new way. In a foul country where a very particular crew have their hands on the hereditary/oligarchal purse-strings, you are the cheapest of puppets.

Deep breath and re-compose. Look I get that we are all prostitutes. But c’mon, guys. Is that complimentary bar and are those flickering freebies really worth it? To guarantee your behaviour and support… for this project? When every man jack of us knows it’s abhorrent on every account? Fraudulent. Scene of multiple human rights/workers’ rights abuses. Crap-but-disturbing, phoney, film-location vibe. A hypocrisy-fest, hosted by a merciless, misogynist state, in spanking-new but heartless stadia because there’s no existing football culture whatsoever!

Won’t be long before somebody leaks or gets hold of the Conditions of Employment for our musical friends. That should be instructive. How, exactly, was this wee bit of sports massage supposed to remain un-reported? Who, in the Qatari/FIFA Department of Further Illusions thought this baby would pass un-commented-upon?

The answer of course is that they know it doesn’t matter. The volume of Fabulous New Content and frothing, insatiable love for the game is such that this further corruption – for that’s what it IS, right? – will barely register. The Lads from Merthyr and Mansfield may have Pied-Pipered us somewhere yet more cynical but who cares? The World Cup is still coming to swallow us up.

*Fully accept the Western View of Putin’s Russia and the opaque Qatari state system are deeply compromised by misinformation and prejudice from our side. The following can both be true: that we are relatively clueless… but the regimes really are heinous and grotesque.