From the toss, the playing-card announcement, or the league office
Highest confidence. We mark with the time the source was published.
2026-07-25 — desk edition
Editorial Desk • Fantasy Cricket Knowledge
Conditions: Mostly cloudy, light breeze
Edition: Methodology
Editorial disclosure: independent • no paid placements
IND vs ENG · 3rd ODI — 14:30 ISTAUS vs SA · 2nd T20I — 18:00 ISTT20 World Cup · Asia Qualifier — 28 JulIPL 2026 · Mega Auction — 30 Aug
Methodology
Methodology - how we write
The editorial process behind every article on CricketChallenge. We publish the process so readers can hold us to it.
Section 1 · Process
The editorial process
Every article on CricketChallenge follows the same process. The article’s author and last-updated date are on the page.
01
Topic selection
A topic is selected by the editorial team. The selection is logged.
02
Research
The editor reads the primary sources - official pages, named beat reporters, broadcast meteorology. The sources are listed on the page.
03
Drafting
The article is drafted by the editor. Opinion is labelled opinion. News is labelled news. Analysis is labelled analysis.
04
Editorial review
A second editor reviews the article for accuracy, sourcing and tone. The review is logged.
05
Publication
The article is published with author, last-updated date and sources visible on the page.
06
Update & correction
Updates and corrections are published openly, with a dated correction note at the top of the article.
Section 2 · Evidence key
Confirmed, probable, unknown
Every preview carries an evidence key. We never publish the same confidence for an unverified rumour as for an official squad announcement.
From two independent sources or one named beat reporter
We date the report and link it where the publisher allows.
No reliable source
We say so plainly and update when the picture becomes clearer.
Section 3 · The source ladder
How we rank a source
- Official team pages and league office announcements
- Named beat reporters with verifiable bylines
- Broadcast meteorology from the official broadcaster
- Platform-published rules and terms pages
- Two independent sources confirming the same fact
Section 4 · Questions
Frequently asked questions
Where is the author byline?
At the top of every article. The author is named and the last-updated date is on the page.
What is the evidence key?
The confirmed / probable / unknown tag we put on every preview.
How do you correct a mistake?
We update the article, add a dated correction note at the top, and update the last-updated stamp.
Section 5 · Read next
Six neighbours from the desk
Topic ribbon
Related reading
Editorial policy
Independence, corrections and disclosure.
About our editorial desk
Who we are.
Responsible play
Controls and 18+ safeguards.
App review methodology
Seven dimensions before we write about an app.
Legal status
Where the platform operates.
Contact
How to reach our editorial desk.
Editor’s pick
Methodology - How CricketChallenge Writes
The desk is open. Pair this page with the match checklist in your hand and the conditions report on a second screen.
Take the next step
Two ways to read more from the desk
Either way, the editorial reading stays the same — what we publish on this page is the same reading we publish everywhere else on CricketChallenge.
Reading order · a day in the desk
A worked example of the process
A working example of how an article moves from topic selection to publication.
The first step is topic selection. The editorial team selects a topic — for example, the captaincy decision for the IND vs ENG 3rd ODI at Lord’s. The selection is logged in the editorial log with the date, the editor and the rationale. The rationale for a captaincy piece might be: the venue favours the chase, the captain’s press conference names a preference, and the editorial team has not yet written a captaincy matrix for this format.
The second step is research. The editor reads the primary sources — the captains’ press conference transcript, the official pitch report, the broadcast meteorology, the platform’s own rules page. The sources are listed on the page. If the editor cannot find a primary source for a claim, the editor does not publish the claim. If the editor finds a primary source that contradicts a previously published claim, the previously published claim is corrected.
The third step is drafting. The article is drafted by the editor. Opinion is labelled opinion. News is labelled news. Analysis is labelled analysis. We do not mix the three without telling the reader. The drafted article has a working title and a working lede; both are reviewed by the editor before the article moves to review.
The fourth step is editorial review. A second editor reviews the article for accuracy, sourcing and tone. The review is logged. The second editor may ask the first editor to revise the article; the revision is logged with the date and the rationale. When the second editor is satisfied, the article moves to publication.
The fifth step is publication. The article is published with author, last-updated date and sources visible on the page. The article is added to the relevant hub — for a captaincy piece, the captain-and-vice-captain hub; for a news piece, the news hub. The hub pages link to the article.
The sixth step is update and correction. Updates and corrections are published openly, with a dated correction note at the top of the article. The last-updated stamp on the article reflects the correction date. The correction is logged.
This is the process every article on CricketChallenge follows. The process is published so readers can hold us to it. If you find that we have not followed it, please write to us.