England men v women?

barmyarmy

Retired Administrator
Joined
Mar 12, 2003
Location
Edinburgh
Can people who watch a lot of women's cricket tell me how much of a gulf, if any, there is between the two.
From what I've seen of the T20 women's WC the bowlers aren't as fast, which doesn't make a huge difference in T20, and there's less 6 hitting.
What the women's team seemed to have done very well is found the gaps, taken the catches, bowled with accuracy and played with control and aggression.
Therefore I'm thinking in a format like T20 England's women might well be able to take England's men.
 
Can people who watch a lot of women's cricket tell me how much of a gulf, if any, there is between the two.
From what I've seen of the T20 women's WC the bowlers aren't as fast, which doesn't make a huge difference in T20, and there's less 6 hitting.
What the women's team seemed to have done very well is found the gaps, taken the catches, bowled with accuracy and played with control and aggression.
Therefore I'm thinking in a format like T20 England's women might well be able to take England's men.

Interesting idea, but the Men would dominate to be honest.
 
Why though?
The most effective bowling in this tournament has been slow and medium pace, plus the women have something England haven't had for a long time - a winning mentality. This is a team that hold the Ashes, the 50 over WC and soon the T20 WC.
 
Stuart Broad was supposed to be playing for to women, but they were too good for her, so she got a haircut, changed her name to Stuart and got a gig with the guys.

Note: This was stolen from a poster on another forum.
 
It's a good idea in theory, but can you really imagine the English women team scoring many runs against 140km/h bowling? Once you get to a certain pace I don't think they would be experienced enough to face up to it and score runs.
 
Why though?
The most effective bowling in this tournament has been slow and medium pace, plus the women have something England haven't had for a long time - a winning mentality. This is a team that hold the Ashes, the 50 over WC and soon the T20 WC.

Think of the likes of KP and Freddy Flintoff, not only smashing them every second ball out of the park but Freddy bowling at 145 kph. No contest.
 
Well I'm interested to know how quick the fastest women bowl but, as I said, pace hasn't actually been a major weapon in T20.
 
I think the world's fastest women bowler used to bowl at 120km/h. The medium fast bowlers are around 90-95km/h mostly.. so it's definitely a completely different game.
 
Stuart Broad was supposed to be playing for to women, but they were too good for her, so she got a haircut, changed her name to Stuart and got a gig with the guys.

Note: This was stolen from a poster on another forum.

LOL i laughed so much after reading this
 
It may not be a major weapon in theory in Twenty/20 but when the quickest bowler that they normally face is only bowl touching 70mph people they'd really struggle to adapt, imo.
 
Note: This was stolen from a poster on another forum.

Could you post the link?

Interesting blog entry here too including this quote:

Coaching and handbooks specifically for the women’s game
… as recommended by England’s coach Peter Moores, who has coached plenty of women’s cricket, including Sussex seniors. He believes, for example, that female batsmen usually play squarer than the men because there’s less power, and that female players – many of whom come from hockey – should use more bottom hand in their shots. Manuals and practices could be tailored for their game.
 
The quickest woman bowler ever was Fitzpatrick and I've heard estimates of her top speed anywhere between 120-128kph.

Women's internationals occasionally play Premier club cricket, but no higher than that. It is making a mockery of men's cricket to suggest they are anywhere near international men's standard.
 
Yeah even if pace doesn't play a part in T20, when your all of a sudden facing 90mph deliveries it becomes a different story.
 
Women's internationals occasionally play Premier club cricket, but no higher than that. It is making a mockery of men's cricket to suggest they are anywhere near international men's standard.

You think the men's team aren't enough of a mockery already? ;)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top