After a few too many minutes frustration on my new laptop, I’ve managed to get the screenshot function… functioning, well, sort of!
As you can see from the graphic above, the voting has resulted in a 50/50 split. Honestly, there are so many factors to consider that an even share of the voting is understandable. I’d hazard a guess that some people who voted may have been a little 50/50 or at least 60/40 themselves. Everything from crowds, TV, revenue, keeping people at all levels in jobs and providing entertainment to people who’ve been starved of such, are things that need taking into consideration. To be honest, I can’t even remember which way I voted myself. Yes that’s right, I vote on my own polls!
Cricket is of course a non-contact sport though players can get close at times. They’re also chucking a ball (Hard surface) to each other. Could that potentially spread the virus? Players constantly need treatment (Physical contact) for aches and pains and most definetly require medical professionals on site and potential ambulance attendance for some of the rare but horrific injuries we’ve seen.
We should find out in the upcoming months if cricket is played behind closed doors or not.
Many thanks to those of you that voted on my latest poll. It’s clear that Nepal are your tip to be Cricket’s next Test nation…
The Rhinos received 44% of the vote, double that of second placed Singapore. Nepal possesses a population of in excess of 26 million people, has a national cricket team consisting of mainly indigenous players and clearly has a hunger for cricket.
Nepal currently sit 12th in the T20I rankings and are playing ODIs against USA and Oman at present. Star player Sandeep Lamichhane recently expressed his desire to play Test cricket for Nepal.
Papua New Guinea are ranked 18th and have been on the fringes of major tournaments for the past decade or so.
Singapore are in 21st and have been one of the success stories of recent times. They’ve defeated a Test nation in the form of Zimbabwe and have soared up the T20I rankings.
USA has always seemed like an untapped market and it’s hard to fathom that cricket can’t really take off stateside.
Nigeria, an exceptionally populous nation, and Japan, have both made encouraging strides at under-19 level.
Whether or not the transition from T20I to Test cricket will remain relevant in the years to come is an interesting thought. How do amateur players prepare to play multi-day multi-innings cricket. Can these nations implement First Class leagues and afford them and the players?
If they can and the Test world does expand then who do you think will be cricket’s next Test nation?
The results are in and there’s not much to choose between opinions…
60% of voters feel that the option should be there for men and women to play on the same team at the highest level. 40% of voters are totally opposed to the concept. Some of you voiced ‘Spirit of cricket’ concerns and that’s understandable. Obviously cricket isn’t a contact sport but some statistics suggest that men average towards 10-20mph quicker than women when it comes to pace bowling. That’s a big step up but then so is transitioning from domestic to international level in either men’s or women’s cricket.
Tennis is probably the most direct comparison. Men and women share the court for mixed doubles matches where the gulf in speed between serves by different genders can be greater than cricket at around 30%. It’s a non-contact sport but is a tennis ball capable of killing someone? Sadly, we know all too well that a cricket ball is!
It’s easy to think about women potentially slotting into men’s sides but what about the reverse. If men are perceived to be a bit quicker and stronger what if they were to slot into primarily women’s teams? Should all teams be mixed then? Would there need to be an even split in the playing XI? Questions, Questions, Questions.
I think that the fundamental question and one that I’ve seen those in the women’s game ask is “Is it necessary? Why can’t the game for both genders simply stand on their own? More questions!
Personally I think that the option should be there but I don’t expect it to happen en masse anytime soon.
Disclaimer: Information sourced from the following article…
The results of my latest poll are in and… errr, we’re none the wiser!
To be fair to Joe Root, he’s tied at the top so possibly deserves to retain his place. Most of the votes were submitted in between the first and second Test in Aotearoa, so after England lost and before Root struck 226 as England drew the second match. I’m not convinced that this should effect whether or not he retains the captaincy. Of course Root was never likely to be stripped of the role mid-winter but with such a cramped international schedule the seasons almost role into one. Could a hiding in South Africa result in Root being out of a job (Or at least one of his roles) come Spring?
The alternatives are limited though. I backed Jos Buttler (As a player not to be captain) for the New Zealand series but South Africa may be the right time to get behind Ben Foakes as gloveman with Ollie Pope returning to solely batting duties. Is Ben Stokes fit enough to assume the role? Is Rory Burns proven and, not meaning to be rude, but respected enough by his teammates just yet to take on the burden? Would it really help Stuart Broad and the team to make him skipper?
Of course the system doesn’t really allow a player to be groomed as captain. The best players make their respective international sides when still young before domestic captaincy opportunities have presented themselves. If a player lingers at county or state level and does well as captain then they’re playing catch up in regards to proving themselves as international cricketers once selected.
Root will lead England in South Africa and likely for years to come. I’ll back him but like many I’m not convinced that leadership comes naturally to him. Just because his teammates like him isn’t really a good enough reason for him to remain captain, particularly when the side isn’t in the habit of winning!