I have made a Cricket Draft fantasy team, but I don't think I'll actively play it seeing as the pages all stopped loading in the half an hour before the matches start. If you can't switch players when it's announced they aren't playing, what's the point?

It's times like this that you realise why Ben Duckett, who's almost inarguably been England's best Test opener since Sir Alastair Cook, feels like he's fighting to save his spot in the team this summer.

Now the England women's intra-squad series is over, I think the World Cup squad you'd pick *based solely on performances* would be: Bouchier Capsey Corteen-Coleman Dean Dunkley Ecclestone Filer Gaur Gibson Jones Sciver-Brunt Smith Villiers Wyatt-Hodge Wong

It is emblematic of Rob Key's incompetence and lack of attention that there is no men's national selector for the first rounds of the County Championship, when the previous selector resigned over two months ago.

It amuses me that this approach is being presented as maintaining stability, because it creates a scenario where everyone in a position of power in men's cricket (captain, coach, Director of Cricket and chief executive) all lose their jobs within a few months next year.

I cancelled my Sky at the end of last summer. With the Ashes on TNT, there was a large stretch of time without Test cricket, so why not? I was planning on picking it up again come July, but I'm leaning towards not bothering at this point...

You could have used this description at any point in the last 29 years.

Instead of seeing interviews with hard-hitting questions like "Are you looking forward to playing for Kent?" or "Are you disappointed about this winter?", lots of people are now seriously asking if they're covering up something major. The ECB *stinks* at public relations inews.co.uk/sport/cricke...

Well I've listened to all of this year's Eurovision entries. My top 5 is: 1) Norway 2) Belgium 3) Czechia 4) Austria 5) Moldova www.youtube.com/watch?v=Masl...

I've heard enough. Make him England men's head coach.

One hour gone in The Hundred women's auction, and ten players signed so far. There's a minimum of 74 more players needed (and a maximum of 90). It is not thrilling television either. I don't really see the logic of showing it live. A one-hour squad reveal would be better TV.

Why don't players like Dani Gibson complain about inequality behind the scenes in The Hundred? I can think of 190,000 reasons why not...

It would have been more interesting to see an England 1st XI Vs England Lions lineup, but understandable that they didn't because it would have been quite embarrassing if the Lions won. Which I suspect they would have done...

"In messages seen by the BBC, a senior official from the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) indicated to an agent that interest in his Pakistan players would be limited to sides not linked to the IPL."

Remember when The Hundred was specifically designed to attract cricket fans from the British Pakistani community because it would shake off the "pale, stale and male" image of county cricket and the England team?

Nothing to see here, just Sir Geoffrey Boycott asking for the identity of a whistleblower who complained about the former Yorkshire CCC deputy chair's inappropriate jokes in a public speech.

With that short innings from captain Harry Brook, he probably has time for a quick pint before he has to face the media. Not that he has a problem, obviously...

The tough pill for England and their fans to swallow is that this was a genuine opportunity to win an overseas Ashes. Australia had a relatively weak batting lineup, and only one of their first choice bowlers through most of this series, but still dominated England.

People like Strauss rely on people not remembering or rereading the things they wrote at the time, like his 2022 review. He explicitly recommended an aggressive playing style, prioritising player happiness and using metrics such as release height for selection. HE IS RESPONSIBLE.

Recommendation 14 from the review mandated a implementing a single, 'exciting' style of cricket for the team, whilst also prioritising both this style and the players' morale over results. "Letting the results look after themselves." Sounds familiar...

For example: The 2022 review's second recommendation is to identify key factors which can be measured by ball tracking in county cricket and used for team selection. Rob Key has done this in relation to 'release height' and bowler speed, without success.

While Sir Andrew Strauss uses England's failures to tout his 2022 High Performance Review, he doesn't say that Rob Key was a co-author of that review. Key has also implemented parts of that review, which we did a point-by-point critique of at the time: beingoutsidecricket.com/2022/11/02/t...

Famously, Olympic athletes prepare for the biggest sporting event of their lives by going on a week-long bender a few days beforehand. It really puts them in the physical and mental state required to reach the very pinnacle of their abilities.

McCullum was right. If anything, England overprepared for this series. After all, they could have lost 3-0 without practicing at all...

As it stands overnight, while he is not out, Jofra Archer has the second-highest batting average for England in this Ashes. Even if he was dismissed without scoring another run, he would still be ahead of Crawley, Jacks, Pope, Duckett and Smith, halfway through the series.

This can't possibly be right. I distinctly remember someone saying that doing more training was counterproductive, and that five days of golf at a beach resort was better preparation for Test cricket.

Jofra Archer: Has a higher batting average than Stokes, Duckett and Smith so far in this series. Would have a much better bowling average if England could catch. Has bowled more overs for England in this series than everyone bar Atkinson. Gets clicks when he's in the headline.

Everything for England to play for tomorrow. Will they lose by an innings, or lose by a mere ten wickets? Wake up at 4am to find out!

It's interesting that there are no new two-year contracts being signed. Perhaps it's an indication that they did not have the desired effect with the players who signed them last year, because there definitely seemed like there was some complacency in the squad.

It's interesting that Heather Knight won't be playing in this year's Hundred, with England hosting the T20 World Cup a month beforehand. It seems certain she's retiring, the question is if she will do so representing England once last time or won't be in the squad. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricke...

More trouble at Middlesex. Some questions members might want to ask at Tuesday's public meeting: 1) How much has Middlesex spent on legal fees and crisis management consultants during Cornish's tenure so far? 2) Will the club be funding Cornish's legal defense?

Obviously it's not going to be a major topic of conversation, but the two teams were 16 overs short of the allotted overs today. That's the equivalent of more than a full hours' play.

A reminder that umpires are supposed to prevent short bowling which might cause injuries, according to law 41.6.1. beingoutsidecricket.com/2021/01/19/s...

I'm genuinely unsure of what the next couple of months will bring. It seems like Australia are as vulnerable as they have been in decades, having mismanaged an aging team, but this England team feels unconvincing to me too.

I have not read the full report yet, but it is amusing to note that the consultants which the ECB used to "assess" it wouldn't meet the ECB's own diversity criteria. Zero Black or Asian executives or directors, according to their website and Companies House. www.ecb.co.uk/news/4400947

It should be 11.

Ebony Rainford‑Brent: "the class barrier is the biggest barrier to entry into cricket". www.theguardian.com/sport/2025/o... Syd:

It reminds me a little of the Monty Hall Problem in maths. Keeping the same players feels instinctively like the safest option, except those players haven't won a tournament or Ashes in over 8 years. It would be better to 'gamble' on something that might work than stick with something that won't.

One issue England's women team faces is that there aren't any bilateral series scheduled until May next year, less than a month before the T20 World Cup. It would therefore be very easy for the selectors just to keep the same players in, even though they seem to wilt under pressure.

Just kidding. Almost nothing will change. We've currently just completed step 1 of the 4 step cycle.

Tammy Beaumont - 34 Amy Jones - 32 Heather Knight - 34 Nat Sciver-Brunt - 32 Linsey Smith - 30 Danni Wyatt-Hodge - 34 Two years until the next Ashes series. Four years until the next women's ODI World Cup. How many of these cricketers have played their last ODI for England?

Plan A is still in effect.

Each wicket takes 2 minutes, plus a review taking up even more time. It looks like England are taking my suggestion to heart.

England's best bet at this point might be to waste as much time as possible and hope for rain before they reach 20 overs...

Poor from Woolvaardt there. Had she stayed in, South Africa might have reached 350...

I've just looked up England women's schedule for the next year, and it is a mess. Only six ODIs in the *fifteen months* following this World Cup. No more T20s until three weeks before next year's T20 World Cup in England. What chance does Charlotte Edwards stand? www.ecb.co.uk/news/4163189

I'm confused. I thought Americans uniformly had a higher level of customer service and business acumen which would mean things like this never happen...

The ICC: Why do journalists not come to cover our tournaments any more? Also the ICC: [Moves several matches, including (probably!) the final 1,000km at the last minute; causing any journalists who had made plans to have to change them - in many cases at great personal expense.]