Benj Moorehead: Women’s game needs attention

Trickling along under the current of this summer’s fixture fudge is the women’s game. England have a handful of T20s and ODIs against New Zealand and Ireland, beginning on June 29. What they mean, where they fit into the barely existent structure of the women’s game, is anybody’s guess. If the men’s game is coping with a crisis of context, its counterpart is struggling to give any meaning to any game outside of the global tournaments.

Games are infrequent, haphazard and largely restricted to contests between England, Australia and India, particularly in Test cricket. There have been seven Tests since the summer of 2005, five of which involved England. The last two Ashes ‘series’ have comprised one Test each. In the last decade South Africa have played four Tests, New Zealand three, Pakistan two and Sri Lanka none.


Chamani Seneviratne, the Sri Lanka captain, recently told the BBC: “I think the ICC could make a request for the countries like Australia to offer more matches to smaller countries and prepare a proper schedule for women’s internationals.”

You can see her point. Sri Lanka managed to squeeze in three Twenty20s in the warm-up to the World Twenty20 last month, but previous to that their last game in the format was in the 2009 tournament in England. In fact, the three games they played in England last year were Sri Lanka’s only experience of Twenty20 cricket up until April this year. England had played 22 matches in that time.

There are reasons for the disparity, of course. Money for instance. Women’s cricket has a small following, and nations such as Australia are unlikely to be tempted by a low-interest series against Sri Lanka or Pakistan when the rivalries with England or New Zealand will garner at least some coverage.

We’re back to the same problem which hinders the men: the ICC offer a loose framework of fixtures but who plays who and when depends on the national boards and their personal agendas.

Lack of public interest means an unequal share of playing opportunities; low exposure for smaller teams means interest will remain lacking. Which came first … ?

None of this is easily resolved. But the ICC has to address the woolly structure of the women’s game, whose need for context is far greater than the men’s. It needs some sort of formula so that we can see the stitching joining one match to another. It may take a while for widespread engagement with women’s cricket to take hold, but if an overall picture begins to take shape we will at least have something to chew on.