Is a woman in a men's preserve still newsworthy? It's 2015, after all and we aren't talking of the badlands of Uttar Pradesh here

Kate Cross, 22 going on 23, is a medium pacer who has played two Test matches, nine one-day internationals and four Twenty20 internationals for England since starting her international journey in October 2013.

Cross, daughter of David Cross, the one-time West Ham United striker, was the first woman to be admitted to Lancashire’s cricket academy at Old Trafford and, in April this year, became the first woman to play in the men’s Central Lancashire League — one of the most traditionally minded setups one is likely to find anywhere.

How Cross shattered that particular glass ceiling is clear in her performance since: she picked up three wickets for the cost of just 19 runs as her club Heywood beat Clifton by eight wickets in her first game. Further, Cross delivered eight for 47 for Heywood against Unsworth on May 10.

Times have changed, of course, from the time the Marylebone Cricket Club wouldn’t allow women members, and women cricketers in England were not given professional status. But Cross’s crossover — a successful one at that — is a step in a direction no one had thought possible. So much so that she has to change into her playing gear in the disabled persons’ toilet in the Heywood dressing room. Is a woman in a men’s preserve still newsworthy? It’s 2015, after all and we aren’t talking of the badlands of Uttar Pradesh here.

The answer to that is difficult, not least because we do not live in a world of gender parity. In more senses than one: skillswise, there might, be nothing to separate men and women, but there is a difference in physical strength and speeds, and that goes a long way in defining what we have come to see as men’s sport and women’s sport.

Is that a sexist take? I’ll stick my neck out and risk it, and I have Serena and Venus Williams, the two strongest (the word is used in the physical sense here) players women’s tennis has ever had, on my side.

At the 1998 Australian Open, Venus and Serena — young at 17 and 16, respectively, but making waves with their powerful tennis already — claimed they could beat any men’s player ranked below 200. [That was the difference between them and the men in their minds.] Karsten Braasch, a journeyman German tennis player then ranked No 203, took up the challenge and first beat Serena 6-1, and then Venus 6-2, and then “complimented” the girls by saying that anyone outside the top 500 among the men had no chance against the American teenagers.

game (which never happened) against Andy Murray in 2013, even as she said, “I doubt I’d win a point, but that would be fun.” Braasch v Williams Sisters wasn’t the first battle of the sexes in women’s tennis — Bobby Riggs, a former world No 1, but 55 in 1973, used the rise of the feminist movement at the time to make a quick buck, and challenged Margaret Court, then 30 and the top-ranked women’s player, to a one-on-one over three sets. He won 6-2, 6-1.

Later the same year, Riggs took on Billie Jean King as well. King was 29, and, over three sets, beat Riggs 6-4, 6-3, 6-3. A victory we can finally celebrate? It’s hard to say for sure. It was reported that Riggs had bet against himself and made millions from his loss, and that helped him pay off the debts he had racked up. Martina Navratilova later lost to Jimmy Connors 7-5, 6-2 in 1992.

A couple of other quick ones, keeping it to the faster, higher and stronger demarcations: The men’s record in the 100m sprint is 9.58 seconds to 10.49 for women; the pole vault marks stand at 6.16m versus 5.06m; the marathon records are 2.o2.57 and 2.15.25. Back to Cross now, and if we are looking at integrating men’s and women’s sport — something that could cause a fair bit of excitement if the stuffy and sexist sections of the bosses were to allow it — the example, and her success, is a huge step forward.

Diana Edulji, as outstanding a left-arm orthodox spinner as one is likely to see, was once refused entry to the Lord’s pavilion — when she was there as captain of the Indian women’s team. She had then joked that the MCC should change their name to MCP. While that is unlikely to happen now, it is safe to say that men everywhere are going to guard their turf, as they see it. More so in what are perceived as macho sports, such as football or boxing. Or in sports that put a high premium on strength and speed.

Skills, yes. The disciplines where skills matter over strength and speed, we could make a “stronger” start — how about archery and shooting? And, yes, cricket, although I’d give bowlers a better chance of making it than batters if we are looking at the top level, or one or two levels below, keeping in mind the pace at which top men’s pacers hurl the ball — around 25 per cent higher in terms of average speeds.

No doubt futurists imagine a time when human physiology has changed. Perhaps these discussions would be moot then. For now, as cricket has adapted to Twenty20 cricket, no doubt integrated sport is another direction to grow in.