Let’s start by calling this tournament a blazing success for the ICC and everyone concerned in it.
We may find faults, but the overall effect was very positive.
Delay, delay
It’s hard to recall now, but the tournament fell foul of Covid-19 not once but twice. Originally planned for January 2021, it was postponed till the following December, then again for thirteen months. The wait had the unfortunate effect of excluding players who had by then exceeded the age-limit.
Size and Scope
It was a bold move to include sixteen nations. One of cricket’s abiding weaknesses has been its failure to cross borders. The number of elite nations (full members) remains embarrassingly low.
It was a delight to see so-called ‘Associate Members’ (e.g. Indonesia, Rwanda, UAE) taking part and enjoying themselves immensely. The large number of participating nations gave them the chance to gain a valued victory.
Even cricketers from that first category, let’s say, Australia, England and India, must have marvelled at the opportunities they were given. Cameras covered every match; captains had to collect their thoughts for interviews. For all but one team there was a new country to discover. New friendships were born, horizons widened.
One pity was that some of the names of less fancied sides appearing (for example USA and UAE) contained overwhelmingly sub-continental names; few signs of the game spreading to the majority of the nations’ youth.
The organising committee didn’t object to India’s inclusion of established test players in their squad (Shafali Verma, Richa Ghosh). Though objections were expressed, an ‘open house’ policy proved to be correct. Age was the sole determining factor.
Structure
From the start the ICC aimed high. Quite apart from that major decision to extend invitations beyond the twelve we might have expected, a schedule of warm-up games was built into the overall programme – twenty matches across 4-11 January.
While they were an essential preparation for the big event, they added enormously to the expense. Squads and staffs would be away from home for at least a month.
Only then could the show proper get under way, and matches had to be squeezed in as tightly as possible. The choice of venues was crucial.
Potchefstroom’s two closely adjacent grounds gave it a prized advantage. Two more in Benoni were not far away. Even so, fitting everything into fifteen days (14-29 January) meant a huge expenditure of effort from everyone, players, officials and administrators, coaches, supporters and media folk.
41 matches were played out in that fortnight.
Four pools of four were drawn up; at the end of that stage only the bottom teams were eliminated. That left twelve to be divided into two groups for the Super Sixes. The top four from that second stage contested semi-finals.
Syd Egan of crickether.com has pointed out one weakness in this format: over the two preparatory stages a leading contender like New Zealand met West Indies, Ireland, Indonesia, England, Rwanda and Pakistan. That is, only one main rival for the title. The confidence they gained from easy victories was not the best preparation for harder tasks ahead. Egan proposes a round-robin between the top four finishers in the Super Sixes. That would have meant India, England, New Zealand and Australia all playing each other. In that way they would all have the chance to play more games against their top rivals. Fairer all round.
But that would require altering the earlier structures, to keep the tournament within bounds.
Second (a comment from Ireland): the tournament will force national unions to put firm Under 19 structures in place.
We can be sure that the ICC will be looking closely at how their plans worked out. Given the age-group they were dealing with, they had been entering untrodden paths.
Playing Standards
This must be the biggest single plus of the operation.
I can dimly recall seeing a European series played out in Spain in which France and Germany took part. Teams included absolute beginners; their performances showed what a technical game cricket really is. If I remember correctly, wides sometimes outnumbered teams’ total runs.
That sort of level must have been an unspoken fear among administrators in South Africa. It didn’t happen. While huge variations remained between teams, they never approached the level of embarrassment. Right across the board, spectators could marvel at the standards achieved.
And success bred delight.
Squad Sizes
A maximum of fifteen players was permitted for each squad, with five more allowed to join, should the need arise. Fortunately very few players had the misfortune of sustaining a tournament-ending injury, and selectors had sufficient numbers available to vary their combinations according to form and playing conditions.
Family influences
One worry I have had for quite a while: cricket’s ability to reach beyond the accident of birth. How many of England’s elite squad and the recent Under 19 squad came into the game without the good fortune of family members introducing them to it?
I fear the number might be extremely small. All too often it has been a parent, grandparent or elder sibling who gave the first nudge.
Let’s hope that this inaugural tournament will inspire more youngsters to take up the game without that lucky springboard to help them.
Conclusion
This tournament had several bonuses, not least to offer young players across the globe an attainable target. It would encourage them to work on their game and make selection more difficult for national managements. The next one is due in two years’ time.
A few closing Statistics
Winners: India
Runners-up: England
Most individual runs: Shweta Sehrawat (India) 297
Most wickets: Maggie Clark (Australia) 12
Best bowling in an innings: Ellie Anderson (England) 5-12
Highest innings: Grace Scrivens (England) 93
Highest team total: India 219-3
Player of the Tournament: Grace Scrivens
A specially convened panel selected these players to form a best team of the tournament:
Grace Scrivens (captain, England), Shweta Sehrawat (India), Shafali Verma (India), Georgia Plimmer (New Zealand), Dewmi Vihanga (Sri Lanka), Shorna Akter (Bangladesh), Karabo Meso
(w-k, South Africa), Parshavi Chopra (India), Hannah Baker (England), Ellie Anderson (England), Maggie Clark (Australia).
Now, who’s willing to take them on?
