tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4896684740062197881.post6853899392188847555..comments2023-06-01T15:03:21.635+01:00Comments on Women's Cricket Blog: Southern Vipers take KSL TitleMartin Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850707584058402446noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4896684740062197881.post-42258795587530077622016-08-24T09:22:09.872+01:002016-08-24T09:22:09.872+01:00Agree with the thrust of your response, but you do...Agree with the thrust of your response, but you do have to look at the players involved & also the opportunities given to Academy bowlers by the teams. For example WS only had 2 Academy players, Luff & Davies. Davies opened the bowling in every game. Luff (a middle order bat) batted at 6.Martin Davieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15850707584058402446noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4896684740062197881.post-2687627116048454972016-08-24T09:21:43.146+01:002016-08-24T09:21:43.146+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.Martin Davieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15850707584058402446noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4896684740062197881.post-61868461285146408182016-08-23T19:50:00.803+01:002016-08-23T19:50:00.803+01:00When the dust has settled and the ECB review the K...When the dust has settled and the ECB review the KSL there are a few things that need looking at.<br /><br />For me, the most pressing is the lamentable opportunity that has been afforded to Academy batsmen. In the 15 matches (so ex. finals day) there were 150 top 5 batting slots available and an Academy player made it into one of these slots on only 31 occasions. The distribution of these 31 opportunities makes interesting reading - SS (10), YD (8), SV (7), LT(6), LL(1) and WS (0). The 31 occasions compares to 69 for overseas, 39 for England and 11 for retired England. <br /><br />Yes, everyone knows why the ‘names’ (aka the overseas players) are used – to draw the media attention and crowds. Long term, though, having aspiring England players sitting on their backside merely watching isn’t going to get us very far. Loughborough Lightning perhaps best illustrates this point. Brookes and Scholfield nearly won them their 2nd match batting at 8 and 9 yet never made it into the top 5. Evelyn Jones was given one chance on the top 5, scored 33 off 30 balls, and was then ‘dropped’ out of the top 5 for the semi-final (and had the pleasure of watching one of their ‘names’ spend 30 balls scoring a mere 21 runs in that semi-final!). Western Storm shouldn’t avoid criticism either – they only used England (x10) and Overseas (x15) in their top 5 (and they repeated this in the semi-final and final). Perhaps it was good news that Vipers, having at least used Academy players 7 times in their top 5 (and once more in the final) won it.<br /><br />It is worth remembering that branded cricket is synthetic. It’s a marketing mirage and, yes, winning is important, but England’s longer term success is more important. It was created to bridge the gap between county and international level but it isn’t going to do that if the England and Overseas players occupy the crease.<br /><br />Next year, each team should be constrained to reach at least 10 occurrences of Academy players batting in their top 5 across 5 matches.<br /><br />Well done to Surrey Stars who blazed a trail in this respect (Smith x 5, Griffith x 5). If they can reach the ’10 threshold’ so can others.<br /><br />Presumably Vipers will be red hot favourites next year when Lottie and Lydia won’t count as international players (nor Brindle for that matter) so they could have these 3, 3 England players and 3 Internationals !<br /><br />Turning to the idea of a 50 over competition. Forget it – at least for now. The franchises have not yet established themselves (hardly surprising when some of them had only 2 home matches). Expand the T20 to more matches – yes, I can see the logic in that.<br />The Clangerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04760786835721279059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4896684740062197881.post-18179450508501627682016-08-22T21:12:46.551+01:002016-08-22T21:12:46.551+01:00My concern over and above the concerns raised abov...My concern over and above the concerns raised above is what is happening to the club and county matches, with many club sides unable to put out a full strength team, selected KSL not being allowed to play in other matches. Where are non selected players any chance for experience against top England players and where is their chance to shine?Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11012962728077515182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4896684740062197881.post-40059307119143060972016-08-22T19:06:05.755+01:002016-08-22T19:06:05.755+01:00I certainly enjoyed watching all the matches I wen...I certainly enjoyed watching all the matches I went to. Regarding the number of overseas players, I think 3 is about right for now. Some say that 4 would be more appropriate and there is an argument for that. <br /><br />It's true that some England players given opportunities to perform, didn't really do so, and plenty of county players were "walking wickets" so to speak. And others were passengers or to be kind, "specialist fielders". I believe Cait O'Keefe for instance played every game for Western Storm but didn't bat or bowl once? If the Internationals bring higher totals, and more media attention, that's argument enough for some.<br /><br />I know that the younger players need to fail a few times, it needs to happen to some extent for the players to improve, but I do think if the number of International spots was reduced to 2 we would see sub-80 scores more often, and fewer 140+ scores. Certainly for a couple of years or so. So for overall balance I would be tempted to leave it at 3 for now. Besides, if an International is not performing, their team is under no obligation to play them. We've seen the "minor knock" excuse used to rest, or leave out a player for a game or two before, and I'm sure we'll see it again. Maybe in 2 or 3 years the number of International spots could be looked at again.<br /><br />From what Connor has said about next year's KSL formats, my understanding was that their priority was to introduce the 50-over format competition first and foremost. It was an either-or for doubling the KSLT20 matches, so that would have to wait until the following year. I think this option is probably best, seeing as the ODI World Cup will be upon us and also it will be very interesting to see what the 6 host sides do with their team rosters to accommodate the longer format. Will they want bigger or more varied squads, or will some players be a specialist for one format or the other? This is only likely to increase the opportunities for up and coming county and Academy players.<br /><br />I think we need to be careful to introduce these new, evolving competitions gradually to help reduce the impact lower down the participation pyramid. There are plenty of people who deal with club cricket who still think the whole idea is a bad one!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10952597754091672288noreply@blogger.com