Borders, bubbles and no bargaining: Welcome to the women’s World Cup
New Zealand’s Covid rules have increased strain on England’s title defence, writes Isabelle Westbury
Michael Vaughan has branded it “disgraceful”, England captain Heather Knight admits it is “not ideal” while team-mate Danni Wyatt has labelled it “difficult”. The staging of the women’s World Cup in New Zealand, with its stringent Covid restrictions, is especially challenging for England’s women.
Forced into isolation in middecember to ensure they could get to Australia for the Ashes, by the time England return from the World Cup in April they will have been living in a managed environment, isolated from public life, for almost four months. It is certainly not ideal preparation for the defending champions.
On arrival in New Zealand, England faced a seven-day quarantine (cut from 10 halfway through), longer than any other international cricket tournament, and were set to undergo more restrictive living conditions than at any point during the men’s Ashes. Some things have eased since the teams arrived, with outdoor dining now permitted, but the constant uncertainty has taken its toll.
While the men wrangled over family and partners accompanying them in Australia, from which the women also benefited, there is no such luxury in New Zealand – only those with newborns, and then it is at the expense of reserve players or support staff.
Had this been a men’s tournament, it has been conceded it would never have gone ahead. But for the women, it is a case of put up and play on.
Still, there are strong voices of dissent. “[The women] might not have played as much cricket as the men’s teams and they may not have done as much quarantine,” said Vaughan on the Fox
Cricket podcast. “But we’re in 2022. We’ve all been going through two years of the pandemic. I honestly think it’s a disgrace. Would the men’s team have done the same? If it’s not good enough for the men, it should not be good enough for the women.”
The men’s T20 World Cup did go ahead in the United Arab Emirates in October, where a hard six-day quarantine was imposed. However, partners and families were allowed.
“It’s tricky, I’ll be honest, living under restrictions,” Knight said after the Ashes, admitting that the “mental fatigue” of constantly adjusting to new restrictions had an impact on performance.
“As a team, we’ve gone through a lot, we’ve done it for two years in various levels of restrictions and it’s not easy. New Zealand isn’t ideal, it’s the hardest country in the world to get into at the moment, so that puts a lot of strain on players, and I think administrators and the International Cricket Committee need to make sure that they’re putting player welfare first.”
A constant theme for female athletes during the pandemic has been doing whatever it takes to play, but with little to no power to negotiate the conditions imposed upon them, particularly when changes have come at short notice.
The ICC has insisted that the managed environment for the World Cup is about mitigating risk. The quarantine, after all, was a government matter and the ICC is working closely with it to find a balance between players leading a relatively normal life and the delivery of a large event.
Contingency plans for an alternative host country, South Africa, were scrapped when it became the centre of the omicron variant late last year. As much as anything, it is important, symbolically, for the World Cup to go ahead after its initial postponement in 2021.
For women’s teams outside of the big three – England, India and Australia – this is a rare chance even to play cricket. Complaining that it is happening can seem counterintuitive, or worse, like a whinge. All of which puts England’s players in an awkward position.
The England and Wales Cricket Board has sought to fulfil fixtures during the pandemic. However, constantly living in these isolated environments has its own issues, with burnout and mental health concerns. While questions of too much player power swirl around top men’s cricket, the women’s game provides a stark contrast. There is no financial buffer to play or miss tournaments as they please, nor a media waiting to amplify voices threatening to boycott a series should families not be allowed to come. Any player power is disjointed and unequal.
For female athletes, too often, there is little choice but to keep quiet and get on with it, grateful they are there at all.