Women's Cricket Thread

[Petarea]

England's women's team looks a bit white.

[Sir Coolerking]

Originally Posted by Petarea

England's women's team looks a bit white.

I'll bite and offer some thoughts. My daughter plays U13's for Berkshire, the County team is largely made up of girls from two clubs, Henley and Newbury (predominately white towns). From a squad of about 30 there are 4 Asian girls. Despite the fact they train in Reading, there are seemingly no girls club teams there (where there is a large Asian community). I used to play in Reading midweek leagues and I know there are a lot of Asian men playing cricket, why they aren't adding girls/women's teams to their clubs I'm not sure. The ECB offers generous grants to clubs who do.

[Notts Exile]

Originally Posted by Sir Coolerking

I used to play in Reading midweek leagues and I know there are a lot of Asian men playing cricket, why they aren't adding girls/women's teams to their clubs I'm not sure. The ECB offers generous grants to clubs who do.

Would it be a cultural thing, by any chance?

To be fair to England they did have Isa Guha and Ebony Rainford-Brent playing when they could. Looks from a distance more like an issue of supply as opposed to demand.

[square leg umpire]

Originally Posted by Petarea

England's women's team looks a bit white.

It seems at this time the 11 best players are white. Do you want to go down the South African root?

[Ali TT]

Originally Posted by Notts Exile

Would it be a cultural thing, by any chance?

To be fair to England they did have Isa Guha and Ebony Rainford-Brent playing when they could. Looks from a distance more like an issue of supply as opposed to demand.

Could be, but India's woman's side was the world cup finalist last year, and Pakistan are getting better.

We're not exactly overflowing with non-White players in the men's side.

[Ali TT]

Originally Posted by square leg umpire

It seems at this time the 11 best players are white. Do you want to go down the South African root?

What's that - having to fill the side with mediocre Afrikaans to meet quotas?

[Sir Coolerking]

Originally Posted by Ali TT

We're not exactly overflowing with non-White players in the men's side.

And a certain type of white player too - it's very noticable at U13 level how much more skilled privately educated boys are compared to their State School counterparts.

[square leg umpire]

Originally Posted by Ali TT

Could be, but India's woman's side was the world cup finalist last year, and Pakistan are getting better.

We're not exactly overflowing with non-White players in the men's side.

It shoudn't be unless they are selected way abore their proportion of the population.

[sanskritsimon]

Originally Posted by square leg umpire

It shoudn't be unless they are selected way abore their proportion of the population.

The team isn't supposed to be representative of the population. Most of us are rubbish at cricket.

[square leg umpire]

Originally Posted by sanskritsimon

The team isn't supposed to be representative of the population. Most of us are rubbish at cricket.

But AliTT was saying it should be.

[Ali TT]

Originally Posted by square leg umpire

But AliTT was saying it should be.

I don't think I did, you have inferred that, mistakenly.

[Petarea]

Originally Posted by square leg umpire

It seems at this time the 11 best players are white. Do you want to go down the South African root?

Personally I don't have a problem with the best person for the job getting the job and then race, skin colour, religion, sexual persuasion etc following, I just get confused as to when this is ok and right on and when it is racist, religionist etc and such things should be given president over actual ability to tick certain boxes.

[Ali TT]

Originally Posted by Petarea

Personally I don't have a problem with the best person for the job getting the job and then race, skin colour, religion, sexual persuasion etc following, I just get confused as to when this is ok and right on and when it is racist, religionist etc and such things should be given president over actual ability to tick certain boxes.

Has this happened in any English national cricketing side? Or county for that matter.

[sanskritsimon]

Originally Posted by Ali TT

Has this happened in any English national cricketing side?

Hard to say. In terms of the men's side, there were certainly times, perhaps before the hostile environment hardened into normative policy, when it looked like Moeen's beard was responsible for his selection. On the other side of the coin, maybe when the team is picked the discussion is all about who went to which public school, who is who's son or nephew or godson, and which kind of family is actually the right one, but because cricketing excellence is generally only cossetted within a certain coterie, the team they o-so-corruptly select nonetheless looks plausibly like one selected on the basis of cricketing excellence.

[Petarea]

Originally Posted by Ali TT

Has this happened in any English national cricketing side? Or county for that matter.

Don't know, possibly maybe, but I was looking at the wider context.

[Ali TT]

Originally Posted by Petarea

Don't know, possibly maybe, but I was looking at the wider context.

Well, South African cricket is an obvious example, but very different to the UK. Did Zimbabwe impose quotas? Not sure. No one else, I don't think.

[Petarea]

Originally Posted by Ali TT

Well, South African cricket is an obvious example, but very different to the UK. Did Zimbabwe impose quotas? Not sure. No one else, I don't think.

Sorry, wider than the world of cricket. At what point is it ok, to what point it isn't. Where is the line?

[square leg umpire]

Originally Posted by sanskritsimon

Hard to say. In terms of the men's side, there were certainly times, perhaps before the hostile environment hardened into normative policy, when it looked like Moeen's beard was responsible for his selection. On the other side of the coin, maybe when the team is picked the discussion is all about who went to which public school, who is who's son or nephew or godson, and which kind of family is actually the right one, but because cricketing excellence is generally only cossetted within a certain coterie, the team they o-so-corruptly select nonetheless looks plausibly like one selected on the basis of cricketing excellence.

At one time Northern Professionals found it hard to get picked because the selectors prefered public school Oxbridge types. Players such as Fred Truman and Jim Laker played far fewer tests than they should have done.

[Ali TT]

Originally Posted by Petarea

Sorry, wider than the world of cricket. At what point is it ok, to what point it isn't. Where is the line?

Dunno, but they always say it belongs to the umpire, so perhaps find one and ask them?

[Summer of 77]

Originally Posted by sanskritsimon

Hard to say. In terms of the men's side, there were certainly times, perhaps before the hostile environment hardened into normative policy, when it looked like Moeen's beard was responsible for his selection. On the other side of the coin, maybe when the team is picked the discussion is all about who went to which public school, who is who's son or nephew or godson, and which kind of family is actually the right one, but because cricketing excellence is generally only cossetted within a certain coterie, the team they o-so-corruptly select nonetheless looks plausibly like one selected on the basis of cricketing excellence.

There was most definitely a class quota system at work in the England cricket team up until the early 1950s, when at least one mandatory place had to be reserved for an amateur (the captain).