Early on Monday morning the sole Test match in the Women’s Ashes was declared a draw in Taunton.
With that declaration, the Australian women’s cricket team can officially celebrate retaining the Ashes with the team holding an 8-2 lead in the series heading into the final format, the three T20Is which will commence on Friday.
Even if England were to win all three T20Is, with each victory only worth two points, the most that England can hope to do is draw the series. A drawn series would result in Australia, as the reigning champions, retaining the trophy.
It’s been two years since the Aussie women last had the opportunity to play Test cricket and just like the last time these two teams faced each other back in the 2017 Ashes series, there were many special moments.
Three Australian women received their first baggy greens – all rounders Ashleigh Gardner and Sophie Molineaux and 20-year-old right-arm quick, Tayla Vlaeminck. It was an incredible achievement for all three women who have each faced challenges getting to this point, but in particular Molineaux who a week and a half ago was not even in the Ashes squad. Instead, she featured as part of the Australia A squad while she completed recovery from a shoulder reconstruction she had earlier this year.
Then to the Test match itself.
In Australia’s first innings with the bat, several women reached batting milestones. There were half centuries from Alyssa Healy (58) and Meg Lanning (57). For Healy, that was her maiden Test half century and made her the first female Aussie opener to hit a Test fifty since Alex Blackwell back in 2009.
Heading into day two, many of us waited with bated breath to see if Ellyse Perry would score another Test century. Heading into the day’s play she had scored 297 runs from 579 deliveries since she was last dismissed in Test cricket eclipsing the former record of 285 which was held by Emily Drumm.
She also became the first woman since 1986 (and just the seventh woman) to score more than 500 runs and take more than 25 wickets in Test match cricket.
Early on day 2 Perry reached triple figures. When she lifted her bat in the air she had scored 313 runs from 620 balls without being dismissed in Test cricket. Her dad, Mark and her mum, Kathy were also in the crowd to cheer her on.
Australia’s Ellyse Perry performances were a highlight of the Women’s Ashes. (AAP Image/Daniel Munoz)
This century made her just one of only four women to have scored back-to-back Test hundreds. Her name will forever be etched into the history books alongside fellow Australian Betty Wilson (1958) and Englishwomen Enid Bakewell (1969) and Claire Taylor (2003).
Rachael Haynes also scored a half century and fell just 13 runs short of scoring her maiden century. It was her second highest Test score, coming ten years and nine days after she hit 98 on Test debut in Worcester. Funnily enough, it was England’s Laura Marsh who got her out on both occasions.
Beth Mooney also brought up her maiden Test half century.
England only came in to bat on day three and Sophie Molineaux on debut was impressive. She took the key wickets of Heather Knight, Amy Jones and Sarah Taylor which pushed England in a position of 5-132. Sophie bowled 29 of the 83 overs faced by England for figures of 3-71, including five maidens.
The last time the Aussie women competed in a Test, I had the opportunity to be there and see Perry make her double century.
While that was probably one of the best sporting moments I had ever witnessed, at the time I reflected that it also filled me with a sense of sadness. That Test in 2017 was Perry’s first Test century; can you imagine what this woman could achieve if she was given the opportunity to play more Test cricket?
At the conclusion of this Test match, I felt a similar sense of sadness.
Over the weekend I expressed some mild frustration that Australia’s tactics seemed to have changed. Leading into the Test match both Australia and England made their intentions clear; they wanted to win the Test match. But play suggested anything but.
Australia was still batting at the end of day two. At this point, I felt like a draw was imminent. With three innings left to play in just two days, I wondered how Australia would do it?
Had Australia wanted a result, my guess would have been that they would have declared early on day two and then put England under pressure (which I imagine Australia could have done given how potent their batting attack has been through the series).
But then, an article by Geoff Lemon made me reflect.
The Aussie women only get the chance to play Test match cricket every two years. Given how limited the opportunities are, I can understand why the batters were given the opportunity to reach their significant milestones.
The bottom line is, we need more opportunity for women to play Test cricket so that this form of the game is not as much of an outlier. We need more countries playing Test cricket and additionally, the Test matches need to be played for five days, not four.
Then there’s the other elephant in the room – one which we’ve watched play out during the series.
Australia have dominated England from the first ODI on.
Last time these two teams met in an Ashes series, it was competitive. But given that England has not kept up with Australia’s increased professionalisation of the women’s game, the gap appears to be widening.
While there is support for the English women’s team, the domestic structure does not exist to support these elite cricketers like it does in Australia through the WNCL and the WBBL.
I wonder what this means for the future of international women’s cricket. It is clear what needs to happen. The other countries need to push professionalism and give their female cricketers increased opportunity to be professional or semi-professional. If this does not happen, the gap will continue to widen.
We need more women’s Test cricket (AAP Image/Dean Lewins)
And that would be a shame – because if the professionalisation of the Aussie women has shown anything, it’s how much talent exists. When this talent is fostered and encouraged, the results speak for themselves.
The last thing we want is a dominant Australia with no opposition to face them. As much as I love to see Australia win, it is increasingly important that the standard continues to lift across the board. In the end, this will yield the greatest benefit of all for women’s cricket.
La grandeur d'Athéna
Roar Rookie
I do not know much about woman's cricket in England, but i could say Australia is decades ahead of next country to promote woman's cricket. Good to see.
Mary Konstantopoulos
Expert
Gosh people like you make me laugh. Imagine coming onto an article simply to troll it. I wish I had this much time on my hands.
Peter Warrington
Guest
post us a picture of yours. i just want to make sure there is a brain attached.
Cari
Roar Rookie
Most English girls have no opportunity of playing cricket at all. Those that do attend the public schools, (that means private fee paying schools in England), who have the facilities including first class instructors and coaches. The result is that we have a very small, just two percent of the overall population to call on. It also affects other sports as well. I’m not for one moment introducing politics into a cricket forum just stating the facts as they are. Anyway, congratulations to Australia, we got absolutely stuffed.
Ben
Guest
Lol just look at most of their bodies. Most look like they'd struggle with a sub 25 min 5k.
Simoc
Guest
Chris that was just commentators filling in time with drivel. You would surely have heard a thousand times how ex-player commentators say how the team will set a target and then the team doesn't. The same commentators did the same, bat on, when they were playing. It really grates the fielding team which is the objective. Then they declare late and the other team collapses because they have nothing to play for. Its only been happening for the last forty years.
La grandeur d'Athéna
Roar Rookie
Is there any particular reason why women can not play test cricket for five days? :-/
Peter Warrington
Guest
yes, good point. I did suggest to M Schutt that if we wanted more tests we probably needed a shield equivalent, even if it was only 2 100 days. The NCL as a 50 over comp is a real shame. (real good cricket, but desrves to be the McDonalds Cup for the women, as well.) Notwithstanding that, when we didn't send Ash the Bash in after Haynes' dismissal in the first dig I told my daughter it was gonna be a draw.
Peter Warrington
Guest
Thanks for that. Makes sense from their warped perspective. I think I would go the other way, bring back the rest day, and be upfront and call it a 4th day pitch deterioration day.
Peter Warrington
Guest
i think the minute England said they would try and roll us for 120, the match was over. If they had set relaxed fields and bowled Knight and Sciver, there is a chance we might have tonked 150 and set them 300 off 40. but once we were 2-blob we were always going to bat them out of the game. england could also have declared before the follow on. or batted a lot quicker to get where they got to.
Peter Warrington
Guest
i don't disagree with the tactics in the circumstances the points table and early results created - just the media strategy that suggested we would see Benaud v Worrell 60-1 styles of play and captaincy, which, not delivered, especially when safe to do so, has lessened the excitement at retaining the Ashes.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Perhaps if they played the Test first then the Ashes would still be up for grabs going into ODIs/T20s which would make the Test more "meaningful" in terms of getting an outcome and should consequently drive both teams towards a win, although of course one Team may decide they have to save the match if too far behind. Conversely however, a big chunk of points awarded after the Test, means the series could be wrapped up after a couple of short form games, meaning the rest of the games won't count towards the Ashes outcome.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
I think you're correct Chris re scheduling. With the move to 3 and 2 Test series for the mens' format, other than the few marquee series, three day breaks firstly free up a bit of fat in the overall FTP program and secondly means less-financially well off cricket boards can get their teams in and out for less expense. Finally it means more of the Test is on weekends. Of course increased overs per day is required, but likely with an overall loss of overs per Test.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Have to agree it's sad they don't play more tests. If the players all feel that too, they need to really push for change. The silly thing is I've so often heard the women talk about how cool it is they have this multi-format Ashes series, and regularly bring up "maybe the men should try this", when in reality, that's a big part of the problem. They have this multi-format Ashes which just has space for a solitary token test match that is more a novelty than a genuine part of the contest. It makes the test more of a joke, like it's just something to survive and then get back to playing the real matches they know and understand.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
You say "T20ers everywhere", but that's part of the point. Women's cricket is basically all 50-over and 20-over cricket. There isn't such thing as a long-form specialist as they just don't play it. Women's domestic cricket in Australia is the WNPL and WBBL, ie the 50-over and 20-over tournaments. They don't play first class cricket either. So you have players who are used to coming out in T20's and smashing it, coming in and playing a test match where the last match they played that went longer than 50-overs was a couple of years ago, if at all. So all these players are out there in the test trying to work out how to play test cricket, and how they have to play that differently. So in many cases they aren't going to risk just trying to play a T20 like innings. Stuff it up and your next attempt at a test innings is in a couple of years.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I believe it's a scheduling one. Usually when we play back to back tests with 5-day tests, they start 8 days apart, so one will start on a Thursday and the next one on a Friday, for instance. If they did 4 day tests they could have one a week, starting on the same day of the week, with the same number of rest days. Something like that. Maybe there's also the thought that when big teams play minnows (like England playing Ireland in a 4-day test) then often the minnow gets smashed and rarely lasts 4 days anyway, so why bother scheduling the fifth day!
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Agreed. Ian Healy kept talking about them coming out and smashing it for 15 overs in their second innings before setting a tantalising target for England. I just kept thinking "why". England desperately needed to win, Australia only needed a draw. Sure, they would want to try and win if they could, and if they'd managed to get England out under the follow on mark almost certainly would have pushed hard for the win, but at that point there was no real opportunity of pushing for a win that didn't seriously give England an opportunity themselves, and the way the series was poised that would just be stupid.
josh
Roar Rookie
I disagree. The real issue is the points system they play under. If there was a minimum 3 tests, each counts; you need to win. Australia needed a draw under the current system to win the Ashes. So it's what they did. I'll add too it's what the men's team would do to if we are (living in make believe land) and we are some how up 2-1 (or 1-0 etc.) heading to the last test. We're going to bat as long as we need to keep England out. Not make it "spectacle" for the fans at the The Oval cause test cricket is dying. It's completely ridiculous.
Peter Warrington
Guest
I never ever have any idea what problem the 4-day test movement is trying to solve?
Peter Warrington
Guest
yeah but nah. this was a #watchme message, we are exciting to watch. made many times. they didn't back that up. which is a shame. they ARE exciting to watch.