We've just bought a new scoreboard for our cricket club. The previous one had "batsman" labels on it. We had a discussion about what to use on the new one, the options being "batsman", "batter" and "bat". We chose "bat" as it fitted better. We then waited for it to be manufactured and delivered. When we unpacked it, it correctly said "bat" as agreed. Then we noticed one of the other labels was "last man".......
BBC text uses nightwatchman. There's no issue using it in the context of a men's cricket match. Untwist your knickers.
I can help unpuzzle you. Women have been allowed to do things for quite a long time now. Hope that helps
TBH,I thought he was referring to the fact that they may need another Nightwatchman if Boden was out & the commentator referred to them as Nightwatchers, I could be wrong minst.
Commentary I was listening to definitely said nightwatchman. BBC text updates do too. But even if it didn’t, what offends you so much?
I really can't see what the fuss is about. There is no reason whatsoever that any term needs to be gender specific. Miners weren't Minermen - even though they all were men.
I would say nightwatchman on habit if nothing else. I'll probably continue to say batsman too. Can't see the problem with having more inclusive terms though. Why would that offend anyone. Maybe in time it will become the norm to the point I instinctively use those instead. This isn't "PC gone mad" it's simply acknowledging the fact that not only men play cricket.