for an ad-free Fetcheveryone experience!

Cricket Thread

3 lurkers | 109 watchers

Ocelot Spleens 28 Feb 4:33pm, 28 Feb 2025 40,444 posts	Quote Pin Ocelot Spleens Fizzy. Sorry. Fozzy.
Dave A 28 Feb 5:11pm, 28 Feb 2025 24,543 posts	Quote Pin Dave A Like you say Fizzy 😉 from your view. From what we read the press has been a lot easier on the men’s game. That’s our perception. But we probably follow the women’s game as equally as we do the men’s so may see more of what is written. Anyway, poor from England ultimately a 6 year slide from the heights of 2019. And poor in parts by the women. Improvement needed all round.
phal 28 Feb 5:15pm, 28 Feb 2025 5,138 posts	Quote Pin phal I still don’t find the tone of the articles as biting and almost nasty and barbed in how they were written as the ones about the women - maybe this is down to the bit below that I’ve quoted from OS’s post. Especially as the men’s history of losses running into this tournament were far poorer than the women’s results leading in to the WAshes. I thought the Stephen Shemilt article from this morning was well rounded when I read it earlier on today. I agree with you on this OS: Ocelot Spleens wrote:It's expectation and narrative in sports reporting.The men were expected to be shite and were. No news.The women were not expected to do quite so badly, but did. News. I have listened to no commentary at all of the Champions Trophy as work has been bonkers and tbh I’ve not been so interested so have just caught up via articles. I know that it was said that the men’s team have been give a fair bashing on this thread, but I would say that it’s not been as comprehensive or as many posts about it as what was said about the women and some of the views and posts that were made about them too. That’s just my opinion and it’s not casting aspersions at anyone and just a general comment as an overview before anyone tries to jump at me for what I’ve just said. A sweeping generalising statement and nothing more.
phal 28 Feb 5:16pm, 28 Feb 2025 5,139 posts	Quote Pin phal [I was also in a different room to Dave and didn’t t realise he was also replying!]
paulcook 28 Feb 5:18pm, 28 Feb 2025 7,530 posts	Quote Pin paulcook I find Aggers was always more barbed with his comments during commentary and then soft on questioning. That’s just one man but I wonder if it’s easier to criticise women when it’s entirely unfair to do so.
phal 28 Feb 5:50pm, 28 Feb 2025 5,140 posts	Quote Pin phal rf_fozzy wrote:But. Like or not, English Cricket relvolves around the Ashes. Perhaps even more so in the women's game than the men's these days. I don’t agree with this. I don’t think women’s cricket has revolved around the WAshes - I think they have tried to more recently to get more coverage but I don’t hink World Cups and their build up have had more focus. I think women’s cricket has been so in it’s infancy in terms of coverage until the last couple of years and there has been very little coverage or importance in the past from the press in general of the women’s Ashes at all. IIRC there was a bit of derision around d the women having a WAshea or it being know by the same term because it’s not for the history of the men’s sport. In positive women’s cricket news - the development group they have out in Abu Dhabi looks really exciting! Some real names to watch in that group…. And there’s some great women’s signings of overseas players been made by teams for The Hundred this year 😀
phal 28 Feb 5:51pm, 28 Feb 2025 5,141 posts	Quote Pin phal Typo error in phrase about - should say “but I think World Cups and their build up have had more focus.”
phal 28 Feb 5:53pm, 28 Feb 2025 5,142 posts	Quote Pin phal (My phones been doing all kind of auto cucumbers in that but I think you get the gist!)
Dave A 28 Feb 5:54pm, 28 Feb 2025 24,545 posts	Quote Pin Dave A paulcook wrote:That’s just one man but I wonder if it’s easier to criticise women when it’s entirely unfair to do so. Yes.