Robert Henderson
If women truly believed in equality in sport they would they would advocate for men and women competing with and against one another . They do not do so because the physical advantage of men over women in sport is huge, fFor example the world record for the 100 metres male record is 9.58, for women 10.49 seconds .

The fact that men are so dominant makes the behaviour of sports commentators (particularly those of the BBC) who portray men and women's sports as just as important as one another absurd.

On the face of things cricket would seem to be one of the best team games to allow mixed men and women games because there is no bodily contact ..But what there is in the male game are bowlers who routinely bowl between 80 and 95mph . The best women can achieve is one or two bowlers bowling the odd ball at 80 mph. Most of the professional women classified as “pace bowlers” or even more risibly “fast bowlers “. struggle to get much beyond 70mph .

Then there is the size of the playing area i. This is smaller which makes boundary hitting easier:

“The size of the boundary in men's cricket is 65 to 90 yards (59.44 to 82.30 m). Whereas for women's Cricket is between 55 to 70 yards (50.29 to 64.01m).

To that advantage for women the ball used by women is smaller than that used in men's cricket. This makes the ball easier to grip, something which is advantageous to women who on average have smaller hands.

Those two advantages alone show how different the men and women's games are. Yet commentators (many of which are female ) go into raptures about a six which just manages to crawl over the boundary having carried all of 55 yards .

The problem with women’s cricket is essentially this, it lacks the strength and let’s be honest the violence. Those qualities are found in men’s sport. Without that women’s sport is tepid..

One last things. The laws of cricket have existed since the 18th century. In our Brave New politically correct world the word batsman has been superseded by batter which all the mainstream commentators have religiously adopted.

RH

Test batting is 90% skill, 10% strength. I can foresee a time when women Test batters are on a parity with men.
Same might be said about spin and medium pace.
Fast bowling, though, is another matter. The fastest women today are bowling low 130s (around 80mph). That's not fast. And the difference between 140kmph and 160kmph is very noticeable.

On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 10:21:04 AM UTC+1, jzfre...@gmail.com wrote:
> Test batting is 90% skill, 10% strength. I can foresee a time when women Test batters are on a parity with men.

What a vivid fantasy world you inhabit ... RH

> Same might be said about spin and medium pace.

And again,,

How about the smaller ball and shorter boundaries, would they be included in your imaginary game?

RH

> Fast bowling, though, is another matter. The fastest women today are bowling low 130s (around 80mph). That's not fast. And the difference between 140kmph and 160kmph is very noticeable.

But pace is the essence of cricket at the progression level. Remove it and the game becomes insipid. RH

On Friday, 19 August 2022 at 10:21:04 UTC+1, jzfre...@gmail.com wrote:
> Test batting is 90% skill, 10% strength. I can foresee a time when women Test batters are on a parity with men.

It doesn't take much of a google search though to see results suggesting that men's reaction times are better than women's so that still would be an issue here in terms of reaching parity.

Richard