The Hundred

[_Ed_]

There's really no need to move the ropes in the women's game at all. In the WBBL last year, Sophie Devine and co were regularly blasting monster sixes well back on the grass embankments, and IIRC Grace Harris launched one on to the roof of a stand at Allan Border Field a couple of years back. And the couple of White Ferns games I've been to at Eden Park have featured plenty of balls going multiple rows back in the stands too (yes, #edenparksosmall, but still).

Needless condescension.

 

[Jack1]

There's really no need to move the ropes in the women's game at all. In the WBBL last year, Sophie Devine and co were regularly blasting monster sixes well back on the grass embankments, and IIRC Grace Harris launched one on to the roof of a stand at Allan Border Field a couple of years back. And the couple of White Ferns games I've been to at Eden Park have featured plenty of balls going multiple rows back in the stands too (yes, #edenparksosmall, but still).

Needless condescension.

Yes there is. They are women, not men. Some male players can blast it miles - out of some big stadiums if they catch a slog in the middle. Doesn’t mean the boundaries/stadiums are too small for the men either. There is also less pace on in women’s cricket, makes bigger hitting harder.

I should add. Women don’t play the same length courses in golf for a reason. They aren’t men…anyone wanting men and women to play same length boundaries is ridiculous

 

[Lillian Thomson]

The BBC’s take on it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/58295400

 

[honestbharani]

As neutral and real as all other BBC "news" then ?

 

[_00_deathscar]

There's really no need to move the ropes in the women's game at all. In the WBBL last year, Sophie Devine and co were regularly blasting monster sixes well back on the grass embankments, and IIRC Grace Harris launched one on to the roof of a stand at Allan Border Field a couple of years back. And the couple of White Ferns games I've been to at Eden Park have featured plenty of balls going multiple rows back in the stands too (yes, #edenparksosmall, but still).

Needless condescension.

They can't hit it as far/hard etc.

The only issue is that almost any misfield almost immediately becomes a 4.

 

[SteveNZ]

There's really no need to move the ropes in the women's game at all. In the WBBL last year, Sophie Devine and co were regularly blasting monster sixes well back on the grass embankments, and IIRC Grace Harris launched one on to the roof of a stand at Allan Border Field a couple of years back. And the couple of White Ferns games I've been to at Eden Park have featured plenty of balls going multiple rows back in the stands too (yes, #edenparksosmall, but still).

Needless condescension.

I agree with this (apart from it being condescension). Leave the boundaries out and they'll find a way to clear them. The women golfers v men argument actually works in favour of Ed's viewpoint. Yes, they both play different tees - but nowadays it's not a big difference. 21st century women golfers are hitting it further than ever before. They work out, they're strong as hell, their body shapes are becoming more attuned to the power game. Cricket is going the same way - the girls who are coming through and catching the eye are girls who can give it a massive wack.

Ropes in is never going to help women's cricket on TV, it doesn't look right. OK, some of those Australian grounds might want to have them in places, but the non-AFL grounds don't need them.

 

[Bijed]

Regardless of whether female cricketers can clear "men's" boundaries as often as male players or not, does it especially matter? (I'm not limiting this specifically to The Hundred). Give them the same boundaries imo - unecessarily short boundaries can devalue a match or performance in itself, regardless of whether it's a women's game or a men's game.

 

[slippy888]

To be honest i never had any interest in watching this

 

[SteveNZ]

Regardless of whether female cricketers can clear "men's" boundaries as often as male players or not, does it especially matter? (I'm not limiting this specifically to The Hundred). Give them the same boundaries imo - unecessarily short boundaries can devalue a match or performance in itself, regardless of whether it's a women's game or a men's game.

I agree. Although, it has to be accepted that as far as entertainment value of the project - which ultimately decides whether it is financially viable or not - there has to be 'clearing' of boundaries to sell it as a product. Not many people are watching T20s for well placed 2s. I don't think watching the women's game at the MCG would be nearly as interesting to the viewing public as Eden Park would be. So rather than manufactured short boundaries, which look contrived, play on suitable grounds.

At the end of the day, there has to be changes in the way the women's game is played to make it as attractive as it possibly can be to a wide audience. I really hope that's not seen as an insult. But ultimately, to make this game truly professional and attract viewers - a lot of which are middle aged men - you have to cater to them in some way. Women's golf and tennis are popular because they're really not that far off the men's product. Women's rugby is not, because it's not. I hate to think this is construed as ***ist because I have two young girls that I want to have every opportunity in sport. But I'm realistic about the barriers that women's sport have in terms of professionalism, and social media protests and idealisms around 'be fair' won't achieve it.

 

[tony p]

Will the ECB give out any of the following,

Official total crowd figures for each ground for matches played at that particular venue.
the number of freebies given out to every ground
the number of NEW cricket fans that have been to a match for the first time.

First two should be easy with technology these days, the third would be harder to say.

Were they happy with the TV Audience for finals day.?

 

[Spark]

"Men can hit it further" isn't a remotely convincing argument against moving the boundaries back to the full ground for women in light of the fact that if you were inventing the game of cricket from a completely blank slate for modern day batsmen, you would probably start with the MCG/Manuka sized boundaries being the absolute minimum, not maximum. That men can easily blast the ball into the grandstands these days on every cricket ground on the planet doesn't mean that full sized grounds aren't suitable for women.

You can't tell me that Shafali Verma, Alyssa Healy, Ash Gardner etc can't cope with full sized grounds with standard rope-ins used in all international cricket, and that level of hitting power is going to be the norm going forward. The women's game is still on the steeper part of the curve as far as gains from incremental increases in power go. Maybe not all of them will be able to completely cope, but is a bit of differentiation between the good and the truly special that bad a thing?

 

[srbhkshk]

If you want the average number of boundaries in a women's game to be the same as of that in a men's game, obviously you need smaller boundaries.
Now you may not want that - but purity of play is not really a consideration in these formats.

 

[Spark]

If you want the average number of boundaries in a women's game to be the same as of that in a men's game, obviously you need smaller boundaries.
Now you may not want that - but purity of play is not really a consideration in these formats.

Sure but I don't think keeping the "average number of boundaries" would (a) change that much and (b) is worth the obvious visual discordance of artificially shrinking the playing field. Not only does it just look wrong -- and a little demeaning -- it also means the crowd feels way further from the action.