Trouble is brewing and the strongest shall win

Alan Gardner14-Sep-2020You may well have heard of the ongoing “culture wars” dividing modern society (basically just a glorified term for the actions of certain men who want to play computer games without being told to tidy their rooms) – but news has reached the Light Roller this month of a far more serious rift. The normally carefree troupe of globetrotting hipsters known as the Australia cricket team has split into rival factions based around their preferences for coffee.Clearly, dealing with life in the biosecure bubble while on their tour of England has taken a toll. Discussing the situation in an emotional, socially distanced interview, Kane Richardson spilled the beans (organic, hand-picked) on the group’s descent into caffeine-fuelled nihilism, hitting out at diminutive legspinner and haircut wearer Adam Zampa for being a “coffee snob” who had never extended him an invite to the famous Love Café.(As watchers of will know, the Love Café was founded in response to the crisis that engulfed Australian cricket following the 2018 sandpaper affair. Zampa and Marcus Stoinis are the designated “rare units” who front the operation, with the goal of fostering a more caring, sharing environment within the national team. There is also an aim to teach Stoinis how to play legspin but they haven’t got round to that part yet.)Richardson revealed that he has taken to patronising the newly established outlet of batsman-barista David Warner, adding warmly that “to me it all tastes the same”. Marnus Labuschagne has also tried to claim a slice of the market with what connoisseurs describe as a homespun brew that looks a bit funny but gets the job done – though given he is only open for business when not batting in the nets (or throwing for Steven Smith in the nets), success is believed to have been limited.Furthermore, rumours that Smith was considering switching to coffee from tea, in a move that could help unite the warring parties, have been dismissed by well-placed sources who point out that he could never betray his preference for exotic leaves.While captain Aaron Finch has so far managed to maintain appearances of elite mateship, mainly by overseeing a series of team-bonding latte art sessions, there are fears more serious cultural issues may once again be percolating through the Australian system. Dressing-room feuds such Warne v Waugh or Katich v Clarke are nothing new, but the emergence of this latest beef/vegan-friendly meat substitute could tear the squad apart. What might be the consequences, for instance, of Pat Cummins starting up a cold brew movement, or Glenn Maxwell experimenting with kombucha?
Remember, as the old saying goes, a team is only as strong as its weakest pot of vacuum-brewed single-origin fair-trade Sumatran.

****

Australia’s old guard, meanwhile, continue to cherish their status as unappointed moral arbiters of the sport, diligently policing “the line” wherever they go. Ricky Ponting has been quite clear about which line he doesn’t want R Ashwin to cross during the IPL – that is the notional, “spirit of cricket” perimeter beyond which lies the lawless world of running out a non-striker for backing up (NB: completely the Laws). However, it seems after a chat with Ashwin, he has now noticed the actual, physical white line that non-strikers keep sauntering past, too. “I think something has to happen with the laws of the game to make sure batsmen can’t cheat,” said a perplexed Ponting. Quite right, too, Ricky. But what possible solution could there be?

****

From the IPL to the Svenska Cricketförbundet – quite literally, in the case of Jonty Rhodes, who will head for Scandinavia after the completion of his stint with Kings XI Punjab in the UAE. Tempting as it is to make the joke that Sweden is one of the few places whiter than South African cricket, Rhodes has spoken openly in support of transformation and his own experience of privilege growing up – and we wish him great success in helping to establish the game in what looks to be an inhospitable foreign clime. Here’s hoping he is able to assemble a capable team quicker than you can say ubiquitous flat-pack furniture manufacturer and is back at an ICC event in the very near future, leading a bunch of tall, chiselled Nordic types who are all absolute guns in the field. Just don’t ask questions about how they will handle the knockout rounds.

A comprehensive analysis that takes into account era, opposition strength, quality of wickets, big-tournament performances, and longevity

Anantha Narayanan15-Nov-2020A few months ago I wrote an article on the top ODI batsmen of all time that received many comments. I have used most of the insights gained from that earlier article to structure this article. The article is updated till the third ODI between England and Australia, played on September 16, 2020.A few points about comments I received on that earlier article.Though I had allocated only 32.5% for the three accumulation-based parameters (runs, major Cup-related achievements, Weighted Cup Runs) in the analysis of batsmen, even that was felt to be too high by many readers. They felt that the performance parameters should carry a higher allocation. This made a lot of sense.Readers recognised that winning major tournaments like World Cups is important but felt that the weight allotted to these achievements ought to be reduced.The allocation of points for Man-of-the-Match awards raised the hackles of many, who thought this overlapped hugely with the Ratings points parameter, which was an accurate and objective determination of the player’s performance in a match. The subjectivity in how MoM awards are given out irked many, and the fact that many MoM awards have been given for all-round performances (even at lower levels of each function) concerned a few.Quite a few readers felt that two parameters, own team’s batting strength and own team’s bowling strength, were not relevant while determining the best ODI batsmen of all time. They felt, rightly, that a batsman should not be penalised for having a strong bowling group or vice versa.Many readers felt that the percentage of runs scored by the batsman in a team total ought to find a place in the X-factor category.Based on all these points of feedback, I have tweaked my model to pick the top bowlers. The idea is to cover virtually all aspects involving ODI bowlers, and to be fair to bowlers across the eras – from 1975, when 19 matches were played, to 2019, when 150 matches were played, both being World Cup years. The key points of difference from the model for batting analysis are summarised below.The accumulation-based parameter total has been reduced to 20.0. Wickets carry 10 points (down from 15 for runs), major cup-related achievements carry 7.5 points (down from 12.5) and tournament wickets carry 2.5 points (down from 5.0). I hope that with this drastic reduction of longevity parameter weights, most readers will be satisfied.This means that the total for the performance parameters is increased from 52.5 to 70.0.The MoM parameter has been removed.The “own batting” and “own bowling” parameters have been removed. Instead, a few bowling-specific parameters have been introduced. Details of this are in the next section.The percentage of balls bowled and percentage of wickets taken by the bowler have also been introduced.I never get tired of comparing the fundamentally unsound batting average and the excellent bowling average. The batting average makes the patently ridiculous assumption that Viv Richards’ 189 not out and Kapil Dev’s 175 not out should not be counted as innings. Hence I have developed the concept of WBA (Weighted Batting Average). The details can be found here. On the other hand, the bowling average is exactly what it says it is – runs conceded per wicket. There are no red herrings to dilute the metric.While I could have taken the bowling average as it is for this article, I have always felt that the two components that go into creating the bowling average (RpW) – balls per wicket (BpW) and runs per ball (RpB) – should be treated separately since I think the BpW component should get a higher weight. Any knowledgeable follower of the ODI game will agree that a spell of 10-1-53-4 is almost always better for the bowler’s team than a spell of 10-3-25-1, barring special situations where the team is defending a low score. Hence the two components are handled separately. Given below are the parameters and their weights.Performance parameters (70 points)1. Adjusted Balls per Wicket (17.5 points)
2. Balls per Wicket peer comparison (specific to bowler’s career) (7.5 points)
3. Adjusted Runs per Ball (over) (12.5 points)
4. Runs per Over peer comparison (specific to bowler’s career) (5 points)
5. Top-order wickets taken (5 points)
6. Average quality of wickets taken (7.5 points)
7. Weighted quality of batsmen bowled to (5 points)
8. Ratings points (average and best bowling performance) (10 points)Accumulation parameters (20 points)9. Wickets taken (10 points)
10. Major tournament performances (7.5 points)
11. Weighted wickets taken in all tournaments (2.5 points)Miscellaneous parameters (10 points)12. Spell Wickets Index (2.5 points)
13. Spell Economy Index (2.5 points)
14. Percentage of team balls bowled and percentage of wickets taken (2.5 points)
15. Maidens bowled (number and percentage of overs) (2.5 points)These parameters are explained in detail below.Performance parameters 1. Adjusted Balls per Wicket (17.5 points): This is an absolute-value metric. The raw BpW value is adjusted by a complex process. The bowler’s career is separated into appropriate periods and each period’s BpW for the bowler adjusted by that period’s total BpI for the batsmen and the weighted average determined. Thus, a bowler will get credit if the batsmen in a particular period played longer innings, and lose credit if the batsmen in a particular period played shorter innings.Wasim Akram’s career BpW of 36.2 is adjusted downwards (favourably) to 35.2 because, across his career, batsmen played longer innings than the all-time average (across three periods). Jasprit Bumrah’s career BpW of 32.2 is adjusted upwards (unfavourably) to 33.0 because, across his career, batsmen played shorter innings than the all-time average (37.0 vs 37.9). Thus it can be seen that the two BpW figures of two bowlers who bowled 35 years apart have been rationalised and are comparable.2. BpW peer comparison (specific to bowler’s career) (7.5 points): This is a comparison metric. The bowler’s BpW figure across his exact career is compared to the BpW of all bowlers who are or were his contemporaries and the percentage value arrived at. Points are allotted based on this percentage value.3. Adjusted Runs per Ball (over) (12.5 points): This is an absolute-value metric. The raw RpO value is adjusted by a complex process. The bowler’s career is separated into appropriate periods. Each period’s RpO for the bowler is adjusted by that period’s total RpO for the batsmen and the weighted average determined. Thus, a bowler will get credit if the batsmen in a particular period scored quickly, and lose credit if the batsmen in a particular period scored slowly.Joel Garner’s career RpO of 3.10 is adjusted upwards (unfavourably) to 3.58 because, across his career, batsmen scored slower than the all-time average (3.90 vs 4.51). Rashid Khan’s career RpO of 4.16 is adjusted downwards (favourably) to 3.71 because, across his career, batsmen scored quicker than the all-time average (5.05 vs 4.51). Thus it can be seen that the two RpO figures of two bowlers who bowled 30 years apart have been rationalised and are comparable. Khan stands quite close to Garner.4. RpO peer comparison (specific to bowler’s career) (5 points): This is a comparison metric. The bowler’s RpO figure across his career is compared to the RpO of all bowlers who are or were his contemporaries and the percentage value arrived at. The points are allotted based on this value.5. Top-order wickets taken (5 points): This is a combination metric of both absolute and comparison values. The number of top-order batsmen dismissed is the absolute value used; 2.0 points are allotted for this. The percentage of top-order wickets to career wickets is a comparison value; 3.0 points are used for this. This is to reward the bowlers who dismiss Andy Flower and Babar Azam as compared to those who dismiss Pommie Mbangwa and Shaheen Afridi.6. Average value of wickets taken per spell (7.5 points): (A spell, for the purpose of this analysis, is all overs bowled in an innings.) This one is a pure performance metric. The value used is the average value of wickets captured per spell, considering the career-to-date WBA of the dismissed batsmen and the runs saved, if any (if the batsman was dismissed before his score reached his mean RpI). In summary, this is to reward bowler A who dismissed Virat Kohli for 5 as against bowler B who dismissed Kohli for 100 as against bowler C who dismissed Bumrah. A spell is taken as the base, rather than the wicket, in view of the importance of a spell to the match result.7. Weighted quality of batsmen bowled to (5 points): This metric reflects the average quality of batsman the bowler bowled to. In order to give it an adrenaline shot, I multiply the wickets captured by the quality of the batsmen (a composite of BpW and SR), sum the values and get the average value per wicket. This would ensure that a seven-wicket haul against Namibia will be put in its place and to reward bowlers who bowl successfully to the might of Australian batting machine as against those who do well against Zimbabwe.8. Performance Ratings Points (average and best bowling performance) (10 points): This is also a pure contribution metric. Average Performance Ratings points per innings are given 7.5 points and 2 the best-rated performance of the bowler is given 2.5 points.Accumulation parameters (20 points)9. Wickets taken (10 points): Self-explanatory. However, by giving this longevity parameter only 10 points, its impact has been reduced considerably. The difference in points between a player who takes 500 wickets and another who takes 100 is only around 7 points, which can easily be (and has been) made up in the performance areas.10. Major tournament performances (7.5 points): This is similar to the parameter for top batsmen, except that this receives a lower weight. In brief, the bowlers get points based on their team’s results in major tournaments and get points based on the total. The tournaments considered are:
– World Cups (12)
– ICC Champions Trophy (8)
– Tournaments in which a minimum of six teams participated (6)11. Weighted wickets taken in all tournaments (2.5 points): In this case, I consider all the wickets taken by the bowler in key knockout matches. Each spell is weighted by the match importance index, with a maximum of 150% for the World Cup final. The overall summary is below.Anantha NarayananMiscellaneous parameters (10 points)12. Spell Wickets Index (2.5 points): This is to recognise the overall value of wicket-taking spells. Only spells in which three or more wickets are taken are considered. A simple weighted valuation of spells, classified into three categories, is applied to determine this value.13. Spell Economy Index (2.5 points): This is to recognise the overall value of economical spells. Only spells in which the bowler’s economy rate is below 83.3% of the team’s economy rate are considered. A simple weighted valuation of spells, classified into three categories, is applied to determine this value.14. Percentage of team balls bowled and wickets taken (2.5 points): Simple base values of percentage of team balls bowled and percentage of team wickets taken are used to determine this value. Often, a bowler carries more than 20% of the team’s load. The two components are given equal weight (1.25 points each).15. Maidens bowled (number and percentage of overs) (2.5 points): This is a combination metric of both absolute value and comparison value. The number of maidens bowled is the absolute value used; 1.0 point is allotted for this. The percentage of maidens to career overs bowled is a comparison value; 1.5 points are used for this.Let us now move on to the main tables. All base performances refer to the adjusted values. The qualification criterion is 100 ODI wickets; 152 bowlers qualify.Anantha NarayananGlenn McGrath is the best ODI bowler of all time. He achieves this feat despite being 150 wickets behind Muttiah Muralitharan. This is mainly because McGrath’s performance figures are extraordinary: outstanding base values – a BpW figure of 34.1 and RpO of 4.01 (leading to an average of 22.80) have helped him achieve this feat. McGrath tops on only one metric – the Major Cups parameter (mainly because he played in three World Cup wins). However, he is in the top group on almost all parameters – there is no parameter on which he has a low valuation.Muralitharan is in a very well-deserved second place. There is no doubt that his 531 wickets helped him a lot. However, he would not have got to second place without being excellent in the base performance values – a BpW of 35.5 and RpO of 4.02 (leading to an average of 23.75). He has taken many important tournament wickets. Like McGrath, there is no parameter on which Muralitharan has a low valuation. One could argue he is below par in the maiden-overs value, but that is a reflection of the times he bowled in.Akram, the master swing bowler and the winner of many battles for Pakistan, stands in third place. His figures are virtually identical to Muralitharan’s. His base values are a BpW of 35.2 and RpO of 4.21 (leading to an average of 24.68). Being an attacking bowler, he suffers only in the maidens section.Brett Lee is in a surprisingly high position, just behind Akram. He has an excellent strike rate – a BpW of 30.1 and RpO of 4.68 (leading to an average of 23.48). A true match-winner, almost always bowling at top pace.I am very happy at the fifth place secured by Garner. This shows that the ratings process is sound. If a bowler with just 146 wickets can outshine many with double his tally, then I am confident that we have captured the essence of bowling dynamics very well. This despite Garner’s base figures being adjusted upwards – a BpW of 34.9 and RpO of 3.58 (leading to an average of 20.79). His career average was 18.85. Note how highly Garner is placed on the ratings points parameter. He leads in no fewer than four parameters, including three performance measures.I am equally pleased at the sixth-place finish of Mitchell Starc, despite a low haul of 183 wickets. However, the base values tell a compelling story – a BpW of 20.6 and RpO of 4.57 (leading to an average of 20.62). His adjusted average is the best of all bowlers. A very aggressive bowler, bowling to take wickets always. He has conceded runs but that, again, is a reflection of the times. He leads on three parameters, including two performance measures.The top 11 is rounded off by a quintet of excellent pace bowlers – Chaminda Vaas, Shaun Pollock, Shane Bond, Trent Boult and Waqar Younis – a magnificent pace bowler who never bothered about the runs he conceded. He also got next to nothing on the Major Cups front. Boult is grossly underrated. Khan’s 14th place, with a mere 133 wickets, is a tribute to the feisty legspinner, whose average is an astounding 16.97. Let no one talk about his bowling to weaker teams. The extensive range of parameters has taken care of that. And let us not forget that unlike Bumrah and Starc, who have powerful batting machines behind them, Khan does not have great support. His case is similar to that of Muralitharan in the first third of his career.Australia dominate the table with six entries – three in the top ten and three in the next ten. Sri Lanka and Pakistan have three entries each.The high parameter values and the associated metric values are shown below.Anantha NarayananGarner leads on three parameters and Starc on two. Despite a significant increase in Garner’s RpO figure, he leads comfortably there. Starc’s BpW figure is phenomenal. Garner’s 5 for 38 in the 1979 World Cup final was rated seventh in my all-time best bowling performances table. Muralitharan’s top-order wickets score is a tribute not just to the many wickets he took but also the percentage share of those wickets. Two modern giants, Boult and Kagiso Rabada, lead on one parameter each.Anantha NarayananMuralitharan and McGrath share the top spots on the accumulation criteria. But it must be seen that the advantage they gain because of these placements is not very high, since only 20 points are available for allocation here. McGrath’s three World Cup wins have helped him. Across many tournaments, Muralitharan has performed wonderfully well.Starc and Garner take the top places on the spell-related parameters. Correctly, Rashid Khan is on top of the percentage-of-team-bowling parameter. In terms of bowling and taking wickets, he does more than his share of work. Finally, a tribute to the accuracy of Richard Hadlee, who leads on the maidens-bowled parameter. His numbers are unbelievable, even if you concede that most batsmen of his era considered ODIs a shortened form of Test matches.Anantha NarayananThe table above summarises the three main groups. Starc leads the performance group, closely followed by Shane Bond and Khan. Muralitharan leads in the accumulation group, followed by McGrath and Akram. Garner is the standout leader in the miscellaneous group. This has helped him bridge the gap because of points lost in the accumulation group.Anantha NarayananThe bowlers who stand out on the performance values are Starc, Garner, Bond and Khan. They have secured above 52 points (out of 70). However, this does not mean that an accumulation wizard like McGrath is lagging behind. He has 51.8 points. Look at the high quantum of points for Lee and Boult.Anantha NarayananThe accumulation table goes as per the overall numbers. McGrath and Muralitharan are the only two bowlers to accumulate over 15 points (out of 20). Akram is just behind. However, look at the low accumulation of points by modern greats like Starc, Bond, Boult and Khan. It is amazing how they have still managed to get into the overall all-time top 20.Anantha NarayananThe miscellaneous table sees Garner stand out, way ahead of the others. He is followed by McGrath and Bond. Michael Holding, Shaun Pollock and Khan come in with excellent numbers.Conclusion
In conclusion, let me say that most of the problems raised by the readers in response to the article on top batsmen have been addressed here. McGrath and Muralitharan are on top, helped by their accumulation figures, but mainly because they have excellent performance figures. Akram is not far behind. This methodology has also allowed the great bowlers across the years – Garner, Starc, Khan, Bond, Boult, etc – to force their way into the top ten despite taking below 200 wickets apiece. So the system used has been strong on the side of the performance parameters, while at the same time giving reasonable credit for accumulation parameters. I can say that no bowler of repute is missing from the top 20. The next five bowlers are Bumrah, Saeed Ajmal, Makhaya Ntini, Ajantha Mendis and Damien Fleming.

Chair of Surrey’s new ACE programme on how to overcome structural inequality in the English game

Matt Roller30-Oct-2020It was inevitable that, after a sun-baked lockdown, it would rain on the first scheduled day of Test cricket in England this summer – so much so that broadcasters Sky Sports had put together a package ready for the occasion.But rather than archive highlights from previous Tests against the West Indies, or discussions about who should be England’s third seamer, they instead showed a powerful segment shining a light on the game’s problems. In the wake of the death of George Floyd in police custody in the USA, commentators Michael Holding and Ebony Rainford-Brent delivered testimonies of their experiences of racism, both in and outside cricket, and viewers hung on their every word; one clip of Holding has been viewed 6.8 million times on Twitter alone.Sharing their experiences helped ensure that the conversation about institutional racism within the English game remained at the forefront of the summer. As Michael Carberry and Azeem Rafiq in particular delivered damning verdicts on the prejudices they faced, the ECB responded by facing up to “uncomfortable truths” and committed to delivering “meaningful and long-term change”.”This summer has blown a lid off the problem,” Rainford-Brent told ESPNcricinfo at the launch of Surrey’s ACE programme as an independent charity, following funding from Sport England and the ECB. “There was a point where some of us knew how bad the situation was but things were just bumbling around.”What came out through the experiences of many players that spoke out meant we could start to unpick and say: well, there are no opportunities, there are no clubs. It just got to a stage this summer that it’s got to be done. I’ve seen a cycle of articles in the media, maybe every two or three years, saying ‘where are the black cricketers?’ – maybe when West Indies come and tour – and it’s a bit of a cycle. But the Black Lives Matter movement has made it urgent.”ALSO READ: What has English cricket been like for black players?While there has been a sense in the past that the ECB have been willing to make the right noises publicly without necessarily driving change, their response to the structural problems raised this year seems different. Even at a time of cost-cutting – they announced last month that 62 jobs would be cut – they have put their money where their mouth is, helping to fund the ACE programme that Rainford-Brent has pioneered over the last 12 months.”I’ve had some good conversations with Ian Watmore [chairman], Tom Harrison [chief executive] and Sanjay Patel [managing director, the Hundred] and they’ve shown that they want to get moving with this and make a difference,” she said. “This is a really tough time for the world when jobs are being cut and people are going through tough times, but we have to start investing.”We have three problems to solve,” she explained. “The first is to simply increase the numbers; the next is to convert it, and we have to look at the individual. I have zero doubt that there is talent, but we have to understand the barriers and their needs. Finally, we have funding for three years, but for us to be here as a charity making a difference in 10, 20, 30, 40 or even 50 years, we have to really be smart, have a good business structure and become sustainable.”We want to accelerate change. I’m impatient: I’ve already got grey hairs, and as soon as I see them, I know time is ticking. I don’t want to wait 25 years to see changes; I want to see them now.”As the first black woman to play for England, Rainford-Brent has ambitions to ensure that the programme has an equal impact among young men and women. At the programme’s first trials, only 17% of participants were female, and only two out of the 25 players were invited to later training days.”There aren’t two black girls in any cricket academy in this country,” said Chevy Green, the scheme’s first director of programmes, “so the fact we launched this academy and found two black girls is something that should be celebrated.” Indeed, since Rainford-Brent’s last international appearance in 2010, only two BAME women have made England debuts: Sonia Odedra and Sophia Dunkley.”At first, I think the important thing in the women’s game was just to try and get participation up, and there was maybe nobody really making sure that was a diverse model,” Rainford-Brent said. “The women’s game needs more attention to be diverse than the men’s. That seems a weird thing to say in some ways, because we’ve seen such a strong growth, but we haven’t seen the growth in diversity.Sophia Dunkley heaves leg side•Getty Images”What’s great about the men’s team right now is that most people in society could see someone who represents them in a way: a northerner, a southerner, someone black, someone Asian, someone who went to a state or private school. As for the women’s team, that’s miles away.”Dunkley, who has been on the fringes of the England team in her career to date but impressed in intra-squad games this summer, has signed up to the ACE programme as an ambassador, but Rainford-Brent is wary of expecting her to be a standard-bearer and placing the hopes of a community on her alone.”With players like Chris Jordan, Jofra Archer or Sophia, you just want them to play. Even though she wants to get involved I’m saying to her: ‘you just doing your best is all we need’. You don’t want them to feel a burden. Equally, I think athletes these days are a bit more socially conscious.”Visibility is massive. With T20 and the Hundred, they could be a fast track for some players. Some of the measures we’ll be looking at will be pace, power, and other things you can’t teach like hand-eye co-ordination. I look at a couple of players: Sam Curran was 17 when he broke onto the scene at Surrey, and Shafali Verma is opening the batting for India at 16. If we find a 12-year-old tomorrow through the ACE programme, they could be doing that in four or five years.”Is it down to me? On paper, no – this is something the game should have done. But I’ve run out of patience. I’ve hit that point. I don’t want people to expect us to create a mini Jofra Archer or Sophia Dunkley tomorrow, but if we get the grounding right, then that will follow.”

How Twitter reacted after India beat Australia in the fourth Test to win the series 2-1

ESPNcricinfo staff19-Jan-2021Twitter was abuzz with congratulations from across the world for an Indian side that broke Australia’s 32-year unbeaten streak at the Gabba and made it back-to-back Test series wins down under.

This win is going in history books ! Young team beating a experienced Australian side I don’t think I was so proud while I was playing for india#Unbelievable stuff #test cricket at it’s best congratulations boys #IndiavsAustralia

— Yuvraj Singh (@YUVSTRONG12) January 19, 2021

England spinner on her No. 1 ranking, the pressure of being an overseas player, and hopes for the Women’s T20 Challenge

Interview by Matt Roller28-Oct-2020How are you getting on in quarantine so far? What have you been doing to pass the time?
It’s day three, so halfway, and I’m bored now. I want to get out. Me and Dan [Danni Wyatt] got a paint-by-numbers before we came out. She’s nearly finished hers, but I think I got a really hard one, so I’ve lost interest in that already. It’s so tedious. So yeah, it’s been Netflix and… just scrolling through TikTok again and again. I’ve just started watching . My brother said it’s really good, and I thought I may as well give it a go. I’ve watched the first 15 minutes and it’s all a bit doom and gloom. We’re only allowed out of the room to go for our three Covid tests, otherwise I don’t get to see anyone. [Danni and I] have done a few HIIT classes together which have kept us entertained, but it’s generally been just feeling stuck a hotel room.Details for the T20 Challenge were released fairly late, and last time we spoke you weren’t sure what the winter would hold. Was this always in the back of your mind?
I was going to go to the Big Bash. Initially I said yes, but since the quarantine was two weeks and in a bubble I was like: no, I’m all right, I’ll pass and try and do it next year. When this [the Women’s T20 Challenge] came along with six days of quarantine and in Dubai, I thought I could cope with that. I was going [to the WBBL] at one point. I had to send them an email saying I’m really sorry, but I don’t think I can do it. Hopefully I can do it next year. I feel bad really, but hopefully they’ll have me back at some point.ALSO READ: Sophie Ecclestone turned down WBBL contract over bubble fatigue concernsWe had the England training camp at Derby, which was two or three weeks, then the bubble at Burleigh Court [Loughborough] and then Derby again which was a month and a bit, and I think the girls had a three-day turnaround before they flew to quarantine in Australia. I think that would have been too much.You played in the T20 Challenge last year, and did well. What are your memories of that tournament? It must be nice to have some familiar faces in the Trailblazers squad, too?
I’m really excited to get playing again. I loved it last year. The girls were so nice and I get on with everyone really well. We’ve got a really good team, so hopefully we can make the final this year. It was a great experience to go out there. I was really nervous. It was the first team I’d gone to as an overseas, so I was really nervous with the expectations of being an overseas. But I think meeting the girls was the most nervous part – a new team, and I didn’t know anyone. But then to meet them all, and they were so nice and welcoming. It really helped. Really glad to be in the same team this year.What is Smriti Mandhana like as a captain? She backed you with some overs at the death in tight games last time
The Indian players are very chilled out – everyone can see that. She’s a really good captain – she knows the game really well, and being on the same team as her is really good. She’s not my favourite batter to be bowling at so to be on the same team is ideal. I was really glad to know that she had my back. As an overseas, you’re going to get those roles and be put in pressure situations, so for her to give that to me was really nice.

I think 2022 will be a great year for women’s cricket. To play in a Commonwealth Games and try and win a gold medal will be really surreal

Your other team-mates include Deandra Dottin – the leading run-scorer in the T20I series you played last month – and Nattakan Chantam from Thailand…
It’s an exciting thing for me and DD to be on the same team. She did so well during the West Indies-England series, so I’m really glad that I don’t have to bowl at her any more. She’s up there when she gets going – if you put it in the slot she’s definitely going to hit you for six or four. And yeah, I’m really excited to meet her [Chantam] because I don’t know too much about her. Obviously during the T20 World Cup we played each other, but I’m really excited to get to know her. I don’t remember much about that game, but I definitely remember the name so I’m excited to be on the same team as her.ALSO READ: Women’s T20 Challenge to be played in Sharjah Nov 4-9The T20 Challenge was an exciting tournament last year, but plans for expansion were shelved for obvious reasons. Do you hope that this season can act as a precursor to a fully-fledged women’s IPL?
Yeah, I loved it last year. It’s quite hot in Dubai but it looks amazing. I just can’t wait to get going now and get out of quarantine. I’m really excited to see what the future holds for the IPL. I think it’s a great tournament, and the men’s is doing so well, and cricket is becoming so big for the women over there that I don’t see why it can’t go big. I’d heard rumours that there were meant to be four teams this year, but because of Covid I don’t think that was possible. Hopefully in the next few years it can happen and we can get a big tournament.You mentioned your No. 1 ranking earlier. Does that put extra pressure on you in this tournament? Did you feel that during the series against West Indies?
I don’t think so. I’m quite young – only 21 still – so I still see myself as the baby of the squad, somehow. To be that young and still learning and be No. 1 is quite weird, but I’ve got to keep working hard. I think being an overseas in general is quite a lot of pressure – when an overseas comes to play for your team in England, you expect a lot from them. So I’m hoping I can give back – they’ve had me twice now.Sophie Ecclestone celebrates with her team-mates•BCCIDo you remember what you were doing when you found out you’d moved up to No. 1?
It was during the World Cup and I was out for tea with my boyfriend, because he was there. He was like ‘Sophie, have you seen Twitter?’ I said ‘no’. He said ‘look!’ and it was me and Shafali [Verma] at the top of the ICC’s account. It was really cool, and then my mum and dad texted me so it was really nice. It’s been a goal for me – that was a long-term goal for me to achieve, to be No. 1 in the world. To get it so soon and to be recognised was really good. Hopefully I can stay there for a while – to be honest I’d be really sad if I get dropped to No. 2. When that day comes I’ll be really sad, but hopefully I’ll stay there for as long as I can.After this tournament, England have a series lined up in New Zealand at the start of next year, and will then start building up to a huge year in 2022, when there are two World Cups and a Commonwealth Games in the schedule. Has that year been at the back of your mind?
I’ve never been to New Zealand before, so to play there… I’ve heard lots of good things about it. I haven’t really thought about 2022. Now you’ve said it, I think it will be a great year for women’s cricket. To play in a Commonwealth Games and try and win a gold medal is really surreal. I think for the squad the 50-over World Cup is a big one – trying to retain the title. And then the T20 World Cup is a big one because we got knocked out in that semi due to the rain, so they’re all really important to us. I was really sad to miss that [England’s World Cup win in 2017] – I was sat in the crowd and it was amazing to watch, and I’d have loved to have been a part of it. But what they did for women’s cricket that day, and to hopefully be part of the squad in 2022 to try and retain the title would be great.If I told you that you could only win one of those three tournaments, which would it be?
I think it’d have to be the Commonwealth Games. Obviously we’ve not played in that before. To win a gold medal… not many people get to do that. If it’s on the BBC, hopefully everyone can watch it. That game we played against West Indies was brilliant for women’s cricket – so many people who hadn’t watched before saw it and really enjoyed it. My nan normally has to buy Sky for the month when I’m on there, so for it to be on the BBC was so much easier for her to find. For people like that who don’t have access, it was great: not everyone is lucky enough to have Sky, and hopefully that can help us to inspire the next generation.