Going into their final round-robin match, Sri Lanka may be out of semi-final contention, and yet, there is a strong argument they have surpassed expectations at this World Cup. Ranked ninth in ODIs ahead of the tournament, they have won half the matches they've played so far, beating England, West Indies and Aghanistan, while losing to New Zealand, Australia and South Africa (their games against Bangladesh and Pakistan were both rained out).

Although India are firm favourites on Saturday, one more Sri Lanka win will secure them a mid-table position - fifth or sixth - something even optimistic Sri Lanka fans might have believed was beyond this team. And while Lasith Malinga has been the team's best player, the batting of Avishka Fernando in particular has been a revelation.

ALSO READ: Last chance for India's middle order to get it right ahead of the knockouts

Most expected Sri Lanka's World Cup to be disastrous. And although their ODI cricket remains poor, it seems in a better place than it did when they arrived in England.

"We've had a few positives out of this World Cup, with the openers and No. 3 having done well for us," Dimuth Karunaratne said. "Avishka Fernando is playing really well. He only got three games, but he showed what he can do - he can produce runs for Sri Lanka. He's one of the future stars."

While 21-year-old Fernando has been a particular cause for excitement, having hit Sri Lanka's first ODI hundred since January, and made 183 runs at a strike-rate of 107 through the course of his three innings, Sri Lanka have also had solidity at the very top of the order. Karunaratne and Kusal Perera have produced three opening partnershps worth at least 90.

The strength of performances are increasingly divorced from selection calls in Sri Lanka, but following years of rapid turnover in the opening positions, Sri Lanka perhaps have hope that the Karunaratne-Kusal Perera partnership can provide stability well beyond the World Cup.

"Kusal and I have different styles," Karunaratne said. "What the team expects from me is different - everyone expects me to bat through the innings. Kusal has been given the freedom to play his game. He can play his shots since he knows that I will play the anchor role from one end. If I get out, it gets difficult for him to play with freedom, so what I look to do is to rotate the strike and let him take on the bowling.

We have a good understanding and I don't race to catch up with his score. I have my limitations and I try to stick to that. We also have a good understanding running between the wickets. We have played lot of A team cricket together."

Sri Lanka have lost seven of the nine ODIs they have played against India in the last two years, but they had won their most recent match against them in England.. Chasing 322 at the Oval during the 2017 Champions Trophy, Kusal Mendis and Angelo Mathews struck fifties as Sri Lanka achieved the target with seven wickets in hand. Karunaratne hoped memories of that win would spread vibes within his team.

"India are a top team, and you can't afford to make mistakes against a side like that. But we have beaten them in England in the Champions Trophy, and some of those players who did that are in this squad as well. I hope we can take inspiration from that win and play well."

Faf du Plessis believes Australia "have learned" from the ball-tampering scandal and that David Warner and Steven Smith will be remembered for far more than that incident.

South Africa and Australia meet on Saturday for the first time since Smith and Warner returned to the international game following their suspension for their part in the episode at Newlands in 2018.

But du Plessis, the South Africa captain, insists his team will not be bringing up the incident on the pitch and reckons "the Australia culture" now "looks likes it is really good."

"I think their records and their performances will speak much louder than a one-off incident," du Plessis said. "I don't think the game will remember them for that.

"Any player as good as them that is taken away from playing at the highest stage will come back extremely motivated. And I think you can see that the two of them are and they are doing well and scoring runs. They are extremely hungry to perform at international cricket again.

"The fact that Australia's been boosted by the two guys coming back into their batting line-up has made them a pretty complete team. There's not many holes in their team now and they've played some really good cricket at this World Cup.

"They are probably better - I won't say people - but if you look at them now you can see as a team, the Australian culture looks like it's really good. So they have learnt from that and they have made themselves stronger for it.

"I think that's a good sign for anyone. All of us make mistakes. It is about how you learn and how you move forward."

South Africa and Australia have played each other since the Cape Town incident. But du Plessis says there was no attempt from his team to try to utilise the episode to try and unsettle their opponents, while Australia were also happy to "get on and play the game."

"There was certainly no talk about the past or bringing up comments," du Plessis said. "As I said back then, and I will say it now, I believe as a team we are a pretty low-key team when it comes to verbals.

"Australia is certainly my favourite team to play against. It's a great competition between two fierce nations"

"We just try and get on and play the game and certainly the last few games playing against Australia that is exactly the same, the same from them."

When the World Cup schedule was announced, there was a thought that this game - the final group match - might prove pivotal in deciding which sides qualified for the semi-finals. As things have transpired, however, Australia are certain to qualify and South Africa are certain to go home. But du Plessis feels that such is the natural rivalry between the nations that both sides "give it everything."

"For me playing against Australia has always been a great battle because you face a team that's always very competitive. That is what I love about playing against Australia.

"They are a very, very confident team probably right now and we are probably just are a little bit off where we need to be. But, in saying that, once we cross that rope, playing against Australia is certainly my favourite team to play against.

"It's a great competition between two fierce nations. So, yes, they are looking pretty where they are sitting in terms of the World Cup, but we are still going to make sure we give it everything."

Pakistan 315 for 9 (Imam 100, Babar 96, Mustafizur 5-75) beat Bangladesh 221 (Shakib 64, Shaheen Afridi 6-35) by 94 runs

As it happened

The ridiculous fantasies of engineering a win cricket simply isn't created to throw up aside, this was an excellent Pakistan performance, subduing a side that three weeks ago, most would have fancied to turn them over. It means they become the first team to bow out at a World Cup with four consecutive wins, also ending a streak of four successive Bangladesh victories over them.

Watch on Hotstar (India only): How the Bangladesh wickets fell

Pakistan needed to win by a record margin, of the kind Uganda women handed out to Mali women - posting 314 and then skittling them for 10. To give you a sense of how desperately flimsy the strand by which Pakistan's hopes hung, that would not have been enough. They batted first and put on 315; they needed to restrict Bangladesh to below 8.

While that was never on anyone's mind, what Pakistan did find was a gem in Shaheen Afridi, who eclipsed Shahid Afridi to pick the best figures for Pakistan in World Cup - 6 for 35 - as Pakistan bowed out in front of a sea of green - both set of fans included - with a 94-run win at Lord's.

The win was set up by Imam Ul Haq, who got himself on the famous Lord's board with a sixth ODI century. Babar Azam missed joining him, but made a sublime 96 as Pakistan posted 315 for 9. With the ball, there was nothing ordinary about Shaheen Afridi, the youngest man to take a five-fer at a World Cup, his six wickets cleaning up Bangladesh inside 45 overs. Only Shakib Al Hasan, who finished the World Cup with 606 runs, offering any sort of steel with a industrious 64.

WATCH on Hotstar (India only) - Highlights of Imam-ul-Haq's ton

Pakistan won the toss and opted to bat - batting second would have eliminated them straightaway - but any ideas of galloping to a 400-plus evaporated quickly. Bangladesh intelligently opened up with offspinner Mehidy Hasan to counter Fakhar Zaman's threat. He would concede only six runs in the four overs he bowled while the opener was at the crease, and when he holed out at point to Mohammad Saifuddin, he had scored 13 off 31. Hardly the stuff of 400-exceeding totals, that.

To their credit, Imam and Babar decided to play for a morale-boosting win, rather than aiming for the impossible, negotiating Shakib's spin threat expertly. It also helped that Mashrafe Mortaza, Bangladesh's captain with a wonky knee and in his last lap, was inaccurate with his lines, thereby allowing them to target him.

Him being hit out of the attack meant Saifudin and Mustafizur Rahman brought back somewhat earlier than had been planned. During the course of his innings, Babar became the most prolific run-scorer at a World Cup for Pakistan, surpassing Javed Miandad's 437 runs at the 1992 World Cup. He fell four runs shy of what would have been a richly deserved hundred, but by then, Pakistan were well on their way to a potentially match-winning score.

Imam at the other end completed his, but trod on his stumps the very next ball, triggering a collapse which meant they couldn't quite launch at the end. Imad Wasim was left to the usual cameo-playing role, one that he has begun to perfect with impressive consistency. It took Pakistan past 300; they posted the fifth-highest score at Lord's in ODI history, and it always looked a touch too much for a Bangladesh side so heavily reliant on Shakib.

The man himself wouldn't disappoint, notching up yet another half-century, his seventh this World Cup, and going past 600 runs at the tournament, a feat bettered only by Sachin Tendulkar and Mathew Hayden. But with Soumya Sarkar and Tamim Iqbal departing early, and Mushfiqur Rahim cleaned up by a vicious Wahab Riaz inswinger, there was always the sense this game would cease to be competitive from the moment Shakib was dismissed.

With the asking rate, as well as the pressure on his admirably broad shoulders, rising, he nicked off to Sarfaraz Ahmed to give Shaheen his third wicket. It brought down the curtain on one of the all-time great World Cup campaigns, but in the process, also wound up Bangladesh's chase. There was more cheer for Shaheen and Pakistan, though.

Shaheen, who has improved with every game that Pakistan have won over the past fortnight, became the youngest player to take a five-for at a World Cup, cleaning up the lower order in much the same way he had three of the top five.

Tamim Iqbal hasn't had the best World Cup, despite coming into this tournament as the highest Bangladesh run scorer of the past four years. It was a bad time to run into Shaheen, who, after a slow start to the tournament, had begun to ignite. On Friday, he was molten hot, but it was ice-cool wiles rather than fiery passion that broke through the Bangladesh opener, a slower delivery deceiving him all ends up.

Liton Das fell to another slower delivery, this one so well disguised it might have fooled most Secret Services. He could only scoop it to short extra cover, and that was the moment Shakib began running out of partners. It meant a change in attitude from the Bangladesh talisman, and once he found himself forced into an uncomfortable position off one that seamed away, his, and Bangladesh's, fate was sealed. Mahmudullah was felled by a yorker shortly after, and the tail was never going to be a match for him.

Shaheen's figures read a record-breaking 6-35 in 9.1 overs. They might not have been the records Pakistan were looking to break, but in Babar, Imam and Shaheen, they have the ingredients for a more successful World Cup recipe in four years' time.

Mashrafe Mortaza, the Bangladesh captain, underlined their poor bowling in the first 20 overs and fielding as the main reason for their World Cup exit.

Statistically, Bangladesh were the worst bowling side in that phase of the tournament. In addition, they also dropped eight catches. A reason for these lapses was their miscalculation of ground dimensions, which didn't help cut down angles.

As he sat down to address his last World Cup press conference, an apologetic Mashrafe felt the team didn't do justice to Shakib Al Hasan's. The allrounder finished the tournament with 606 runs along with 11 wickets.

"Little things made a huge difference," Mashrafe said "Shakib (Al Hasan) was absolutely beautiful. Batted at three, did what he could do. I really feel sorry for him. The way he played, the team could have been standing in a different zone. I think he is one of the best World Cup performers of all time. Still, we couldn't make the semifinals."

Then he got down to the specifics. "Bowling has not been up to the mark, starting from me and the others, especially the first 10 or 20 overs," he lamented. "We needed to pick wickets. Some matches the fielding really cost us, ground fielding especially. It helps the bowlers when fielders back you up. Catches were dropped, it happens, but when it keeps happening questions will of course be asked."

Mashrafe felt fielding had been a concern all along, calling it the single-biggest difference between Bangladesh and the semifinalists. "I think players tried their best. We could improve in a few areas. We knew our weaknesses. But we could not prove that weaknesses could be improved.

"But the way we played, we could have finished a little better. If we could have finished the match on a good note, we could have said luck wasn't with us. A few things we have been really good, but few has not been with us.

"Going forward we need to be concerned - if you ask me for this tournament, bowling is a big issue. If we play in Asia, we are a far better bowling side. Fielding has been a concern throughout my career. When someone gets partnerships, we go down and down. We have to improve in fielding."

South Africa captain Faf du Plessis believes it would be "amazing" if the ICC was to act on Jason Holder's suggestion of introducing a minimum wage into international cricket. However, du Plessis also conceded it was "a long way from happening", and said that he would be taking time after the World Cup to weigh up his own future as a South Africa player.

Holder, the West Indies captain, made the suggestion in February following Duanne Olivier's decision to sign a Kolpak deal Yorkshire. He warned that unless "something is properly done to keep players a bit more grounded financially" it could become hard to maintain the quality of international cricket, and he revealed he had held discussions with the Federation of International Cricketers' Associations (FICA) on the subject.

Du Plessis was positive about the possibility of such an initiative, with the issue of losing players to the T20 circuit or Kolpak deals remaining an "area of big concern" for CSA. But in accepting that South Africa could lose more players once the tournament has ended, he admitted he had not yet come to a decision about his own career. JP Duminy and Imran Tahir have already announced plans to retire from international cricket following South Africa's final World Cup game on Saturday.

"There are almost two groups of players when it comes to South African cricketers," he said. "There's your Test players - and for them the Kolpak option is the dangling carrot - and there are your white-ball specialists, where the T20 circuit around the world [is the carrot]. Both of those areas are a big concern for cricketers in South Africa.

"Looking at the one-day side, your players that will move on from the Proteas would potentially move on to the T20 circuit, maybe bar one or two, but that is generally where the opportunities lie for the white-ball players. I think, naturally, with some of the guys finishing, they'll do that. That will become the biggest issue for us to try and stay away from for all players. And that's including myself.

"My plan was to commit fully to the World Cup and not even think of anything else further than the World Cup because I didn't want my mind to start drifting into the future. I wanted to be completely present in this World Cup.

"Right now is possibly not the best time to be making decisions because you are disappointed - I won't say emotional - but you don't want to be in this mode when you are making career decisions. So, for me, it will be a case of taking some time off and reflecting on what the future looks like for me; what's my purpose going forward; is it still playing all three formats for South Africa? Those are the things that I would need to consider.

"I feel in terms of my own game, the last year is certainly the best I have ever played. I still believe I'm on top of my own game, so performance-wise there is no question marks there.

"It's just making sure that there's a lot of purpose to what I'm doing. I've had a huge belief the last year and it's been very easy for me to not even consider anything else because my purpose in captaining this team has been so strong. I didn't even think of anything else.

"So, in the two or three weeks after this tournament, I will have a real look and see what the future holds for me."

The route of South Africa's problems are economic. The cricket board is simply unable to match the money on offer in T20 leagues or county cricket and has seen a steady stream of departures in recent years. And while du Plessis acknowledged that South Africa are not alone in suffering with such issues - he referred to all nations other than England, India and Australia as "second-tier nations" - he did not feel any further distribution of wealth is likely.

"It would be great for the rest of the teams if you could do that," du Plessis replied when asked if he would welcome the ICC subsidising international salaries where appropriate. "If I had that much power to say that to the ICC I think I would have said it a long time ago. That is the perfect world, but we don't live in a perfect world.

"Sri Lanka, New Zealand, West Indies and Pakistan: I think all of us fall into the same category, like maybe your second-tier nations and then you get your top tier which is a little bit different. West Indies are a great example. They probably are the worst off and that is why they have lost so many players to the circuit.

"I think England, Australia, India will always be the higher-paid nations. It is easier for the guys who are playing for England or Australia or India to remain in their countries and just play their cricket there. Obviously the currency is very strong but also the packages that they get paid are obviously a lot different to your smaller nations.

"If that changes, it will be amazing for the rest of the world, but I think it's a long, long way from happening."

Former New England Patriots linebacker and current ESPN analyst Tedy Bruschi is recovering after suffering a stroke Thursday, his family said in a statement.

"He recognized his warning signs immediately: arm weakness, face drooping and speech difficulties. Tedy is recovering well," according to the statement issued Friday. "Tedy and his family thank you for your ongoing encouragement, and kindly ask for privacy at this time."

Bruschi, 46, previously suffered a stroke in 2005, while he was a member of the Patriots. He missed the first six weeks of the season, then returned to play eight months after the stroke.

"I had 366 tackles in the NFL as a stroke survivor," he said upon his retirement. "And I'm very proud of that."

Bruschi, a linebacker who was elected to the Pro Bowl in 2004, played 13 seasons for the Patriots. He retired before the 2009 season and joined ESPN shortly afterward.

"Tedy has the complete support of ESPN and we wish him a speedy recovery," the network said in a statement.

The family said Bruschi was taken to Sturdy Memorial Hospital in Attleboro, Massachusetts.

Bruschi created a running club called Tedy's Team to raise funds and awareness for the American Stroke Association. He has run the Boston Marathon three times, including in 2019.

Coco Gauff's run through Wimbledon continues.

The American teenager saved two match points in the second set, won a tiebreaker and then outlasted Slovenia's Polona Hercog for a 3-6, 7-6 (7), 7-5 victory in the third round Friday.

Gauff, 15, is the youngest player to come through qualifying for Wimbledon in the Open era. She reached the third round by upsetting Venus Williams then beating former semifinalist Magdalena Rybarikova.

Also in the women's draw, two former No. 1s advanced to the fourth round and another two lost in the third round.

Third-seeded Karolina Pliskova defeated Su-Wei Hsieh 6-3, 2-6, 6-4, while 14th-seeded Caroline Wozniacki lost to Zhang Shuai 6-4, 6-2. In a match between two former top-ranked players, Simona Halep beat Victoria Azarenka 6-3, 6-1 on Centre Court.

Wozniacki was leading 4-0 in the first set and also broke Zhang in the opening game of the second before losing four straight games. The Dane repeatedly grew frustrated with the result of Hawk-Eye challenges, complaining to the chair umpire on several occasions that the calls made by the review system were wrong.

"I thought there was a few ones that I saw way differently," Wozniacki said. "But it is what it is. You can't really change a Hawk-Eye call."

Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

*This year, for the first time, Major League Baseball will award $1 million to the winner of the Home Run Derby. This prize could very well become a footnote in history. Then again, it might mean something a bit more. What are the chances it changes sports forever? Let's say, 15%. In other words, the following could be a true story.

Major League Baseball didn't realize what it was doing, and for many years it didn't realize what it had done. At the time -- this was 2019 -- it seemed a sensible fix to a minor problem. And in a $10 billion industry, what could a measly million dollars change?

Little did MLB know that the seven-figure prize for that summer's Home Run Derby champion would change sports in ways that, in retrospect, seem inevitable -- although at the time these changes were only speculated about. Over the next century, Big League Derby would rise to become one of the world's Big Four sports. In the view of many, derby displaced traditional baseball; in the view of others, derby saved it.

1. The Rise of the Home Run (1919-1958)

The 2019 Home Run Derby marked the centennial of the home run itself. Before Babe Ruth, home runs had existed; baseball folks had to call it something when a player got more than a triple. But before Ruth, no one tried for home runs; they just happened, and seldom. Then Ruth hit 29 homers in 1919, outhomering entire teams and putting a successful pitching career aside. He became the best player in history, the biggest celebrity in the country, and he brought the rest of the sport with him into the future.

Along the way, Ruth also invented something like a home run derby. When he was barnstorming across the country, fans would pack local grandstands to see him homer. All of the sport's regular rules and protocols went out the window: Local pitchers were given clear instructions to groove pitches, or Ruth would stay at the plate until he put a pitch out. During intermissions at exhibition doubleheaders, he might stand at the plate and launch homer after homer, aiming for local distance records to reward the fans who had paid a buck to see some dingers. This was the philosophical origin of the home run contest: The single-handed pursuit of home runs had become more marketable, more meaningful, than the baseball played on those afternoons under real rules.

In 1933, Ruth won a fungo-hitting contest -- an early "derby" of sorts -- by hitting a ball 395 feet. In the next few decades, home run contests became staples of exhibition events. Ted Williams, Ralph Kiner, Joe DiMaggio and other superstars would step out of the canon and do things that were, in many ways, even more memorable.

"The greatest single sports event I ever saw," the great slugger Frank Howard once said, occurred when Ted Williams was in a charity home run contest. "Ted had to be 53, 54 years old. While the other guys were hitting, he was in the dugout, swinging a bat and grinding himself up. He was the last one to hit, of course, and when he went up there, you knew he was ready. First pitch, he hit a little looper over second base. Second pitch, he pulled a frozen rope by first base. Third pitch, he put it on the warning track. Fourth pitch, he put it in the bullpen. Fifth pitch, he hit it 30 rows up in the right-field stands. Then he threw the bat up in the air and walked back to the dugout. The place went wild. Greatest single sports event I've ever seen.''

2. The Derby Goes Mainstream (1959-2018)

In 1959, a Los Angeles sportscaster named Mark Scott created Home Run Derby, a syndicated television contest that drew in an extraordinarily talented cast of participants for what was, essentially, a game show about dingers. The first episode pitted Willie Mays against Mickey Mantle in a high-stakes round of competitive batting practice. Mantle came from behind and won $2,000, in an empty and silent Southern California ballpark.

The show aired for only one season -- Scott died unexpectedly -- but the basic structure of the Home Run Derby had been codified, put on film and backed by significant prize money and star power. In 1974, CBS Sports Spectacular aired a contest between Hank Aaron and Sadaharu Oh, the home run champs of two hemispheres. In 1984, Gatorade sponsored a "Super Slam home-run hitting contest" over the course of the season, with sluggers hitting against each other in pregame competitions to advance. Greg Luzinski, an aging slugger in his final season, won the contest and $50,000. Nine months later, looking to add something novel to the All-Star Game in Minnesota, Major League Baseball brought the derby to the Midsummer Classic. It wasn't televised, but 46,000 fans showed up, paying $2 apiece for charity. One of the kids in the outfield robbed Ryne Sandberg of a home run. The whole thing got two sentences in the New York Times.

The syndicated 1960s version of the show was, all too clearly, ahead of its time. It showed how fluidly the derby and TV could interact, with rapid-fire action, close camera angles that would be impossible in a real game, easy-to-understand rules and scoring that didn't require viewer expertise, and mid-round banter between the broadcaster and the opposing hitter, who rested in the broadcast booth between his rounds. At the time broadcast technology was gray and low-fi, and it was all but impossible to see many of the deep fly balls, let alone appreciate the grandeur of them. But by 1993, when ESPN began airing the derby during All-Star week, technology had caught up to the derby's potential.

The derbies of the next 25 years produced some of baseball's most memorable moments. The format could offer narrative fulfillment (Josh Hamilton hitting a record 28 homers in a round in 2008, after coming back from drug addiction) or suspense (Bryce Harper winning in his home ballpark as time expired in 2018) or comic relief (Cody Bellinger cackling in disbelief at the rookie Aaron Judge's staggering 2017 performance). Baseball, the sport, sometimes obscured how good its players were, how much better they were than players in previous generations. But home run derbies made that generational progress visible and obvious: Where Ryne Sandberg had won the 1990 Derby with three homers, Giancarlo Stanton won the 2016 derby with 61. A viewer could appreciate this, and did: About as many people watched Judge and Stanton in the 2017 derby as watched the All-Star Game the next day.

But as the derby got more popular, there were problems with incentives. A growing number of players -- especially the very best players -- didn't want to take part in something that didn't count (the derby) if it might disrupt their preparation for something that did (real games). So Major League Baseball tried to make the derby count, using the one tool that can make anything count: money. The winner of the 2019 contest would get a million bucks. The winner of that contest might well make only half that much for playing the entire baseball season.

3. The Birth of a New Sport (2019-2039)

That was the first big moment, the million-dollar prize. (The derby got so popular that, in later collective bargaining sessions, the prize would be upped to $2 million, then $5 million, then $10 million, before BLD split off from MLB, became a nonprofit entity, and established purses directly from revenue.) The next big moment came in 2020, when -- in a nod to the popularity of baseball prospects -- MLB mandated that each league's derby contestants should include at least one minor league prospect. And one of those minor league prospects -- Oneil Cruz, a 6-foot-7, left-handed slugger in the Pirates' organization -- actually won. A player who was making $30,000 a year at Double-A had just won a million bucks, and suddenly the nature of the competition had changed. The prize was no longer just an incentive to encourage superstar participation. Viewers actively rooted for the underdogs, wanting to see them cry with joy while accepting a giant check.

The underdog prospect became such a big part of the show's narrative structure that MLB went further: An amateur prospect (technically, a recently drafted amateur, to get around rules that at the time prohibited college players from being compensated) must also be included. And then the league began giving one slot to an amateur non-prospect: Just some guy in his 30s who could mash, chosen from play-in competitions. It was easy to justify using a spot this way, because the mashing amateur -- with a swing and training regimen devoted to mastering the derby format -- often out-slugged major leaguers in the contest. Soon, MLB was putting on not one derby a year but a half-dozen, all in prime time. Then, more.

Two things became clear from the success of non-major leaguers in the derby: The skills required to hit 40 home runs in 10 minutes against grooved 70 mph pitches were very different from the skills required to hit one home run every four days against 94 mph cutters; and the derby skills could be trained, with proper focus. For major league hitters making $35 million per season, the incentives didn't favor developing the derby skill, especially not at the expense of the traditional hitting skills. But for scores of muscular minor leaguers, the incentives shifted. The minor leagues required long bus rides for terrible pay and extremely long odds of reaching the majors; but the derby was a way to get rich. Some of these minor leaguers began training with a derby swing coach to develop derby-specific strength, techniques and stamina. Some made fortunes. (Tim Tebow, a football icon, had tried and failed, with much scorn among some baseball watchers, to convert to the traditional sport; but he tried and succeeded, in his late 30s, at derby.)

The derby stars came in all shapes: Some were behemoths imported from strongman competitions, swinging colossal 55-ounce bats. (Unlike in traditional baseball, bats rarely break in derby. A player would name his bat, and mythologies would arise around some bats. Bats would be passed around, sold, bequeathed. Some bats were almost as famous as their swingers.) Other stars were bat-control technicians who mastered the act of hitting balls just a few feet farther than necessary, over and over and over, and who never seemed to tire or take a bad swing. When Anthony David "A.D." Power, a high school coach from Fresno, hit homers on 165 consecutive swings in 2034, Mike Trout called him the greatest athlete in the world. Nike gave Power a $100 million endorsement deal. His bat went to the baseball Hall of Fame -- the final derby souvenir that would be sent to Cooperstown. All future memorabilia would go to the Derby Hall of Fame, in Linden, California.

4. The Modern Derby (2040-2119)

The Home Run Derby that Aaron Judge won in 2017 bears little similarity to the Big League Derby Championship Series in which Judge's great-great grandson, Han Judge, will compete this month.

By 2040, Big League Derby realized the sport wouldn't keep growing without innovating. It needed to give audiences some variety, and it began by reconsidering the physical space. All the empty greenage of a baseball diamond and outfield would be, for derbies, a giant canvas. Venues built stages in center field and had the biggest musical acts perform during derbies, behind the safety of nets. They launched fireworks shows from second base, the home runs cutting through the sparklers and smoky clouds. They built berms on which spectators could sit in the outfield, so fans could watch the home runs soar directly overhead. (Fifteen-foot nets behind the pitcher's mound caught line drives.) Because there was no need for foul territory, and no wild pitches, spectators could crowd around the hitter, like at a golf tournament: Seating (and netting) began 6 feet behind home plate, with more seating (and netting) 40 feet in front of the hitter, a terrifying -- if totally safe -- viewing experience.

BLD then realized it needn't follow the restrictive layout of a baseball stadium at all. Derby fields were built just offshore, with platforms for pitcher and batter and home run targets erected as mini islands 400 feet away; on mountain plateaus; across covered thoroughfares; and in the middle of cities, the "fences" demarcated by 26-story buildings. Some derbies had 220 degrees of fair territory; others had only 150 degrees, to add difficulty. Non-league matches were often filmed in batting cages and transported, by digital effects and television production, to the moon, or above the clouds, or into fantasy worlds populated by giant reptilian monsters that swatted down home runs.

The competition became more elaborate, and tournaments followed their own house rules: Rounds of speed hitting might interspersed with the more patient, wait-for-your-pitch rounds; pitching machines might be used to deliver perfect strikes progressively faster, until batters had to hit 135 mph pitches in final rounds; and in team competitions, lefties and righties on opposing squads would hit simultaneously in a single-camera race against each other. Each competition also had its own scoring quirks: extra points for hitting pitches that were out of the strike zone; progressively higher rewards for consecutive homers; requirements that homers be sprayed to different parts of the bleachers; and scoring based on total distance, or longest homers, in addition to number of homers.

Some people hated it, naturally, just as some people hate any sport. Many traditional baseball fans hated it, but it was never intended to be a replacement for traditional baseball. It was a clearly distinct alternative. It offered none of the leisurely pace traditional baseball did, but it also had none of those things that drove many baseball fans crazy: There were virtually no injuries and no elbow surgeries, no umpire mistakes, no pace-of-play issues, no strikeouts, no foul balls, no hours spent trying to keep track of anonymous relievers churning through middle and late innings, no labor stoppages. In Big League Derby, the celebrity of the players could easily be highlighted, rather than suppressed. The biggest stars of the sport were easily found, in closeups, in celebrations, always on screen and unobscured by even a batting helmet. And a casual fan could turn on a contest and understand immediately who was winning, how the game worked, and that a ball traveling that far was something to behold.

5. The Game of 'Baseball' Today

Baseball isn't nearly the cultural force it once was. Some blame Big League Derby. But it was clear to many, even in 2019, that this decline was already well underway.

The fan base had gotten much older, and competition for young viewers' attention by other entertainments and technologies had become overwhelming. Meanwhile, the sport's style and pace of play had turned many viewers off, and MLB -- wary of doing anything radical and risking its owners' immense present-day profits -- would do little more than tinker with the rules. A livelier baseball led to more home runs, and more short-term profits, but those home runs paradoxically exacerbated the style and pace-of-play issues that made the modern game stagnant. (Historians still debate how actively MLB "allowed" this livelier ball.)

When Big League Derby split off from Major League Baseball, taking many of the traditional sport's top sluggers with it, baseball faced a crisis. How could it compete, with just two home runs per game, against a sport that had 40 homers between commercial breaks? Baseball's perpetual quest to rebrand itself For The Kids began, finally, to seem hopeless. And so the sport went back to what it had been at the start: a very complicated, and lively, game of tag.

Bleachers were torn out, and outfield walls were moved back and raised to 100 feet, so that almost every fair ball would stay in play. Bases were moved 2 feet nearer each other to encourage baserunning, and baserunners. Outfield gloves were restricted to 9 inches. Each team could carry only three pitchers per game. The strike zone was expanded, and foul balls were no different from other strikes, no matter the count. Speed, defense and the ability to put the ball in play were the most highly valued skills in the sport. Few true sluggers chose baseball over derby by that point, anyway.

Some people hated it, naturally, just as some people hate any sport. But baseball was active again. It was a shrinking sport but not a dying one. Baseball fans loved baseball.

To the derby fan, the phrase "home run" is an idiom, its meaning detached from the original, literal meaning of its component words. There is no home. There is no running. A home run is the thing you do in a home run derby, nothing more.

But in baseball, the phrase has become ever more literal. After Babe Ruth, a home run rarely required running. After Babe Ruth, it sometimes felt like the sport itself rarely required running. Now, though, a home run is what it once was: 15 seconds of running, running, running, until the batter slides in safe. He's home.

Pro:Direct Running offering opportunity to test, win or buy Vaporfly NEXT% at the Night of the 10,000m PBs

There is plenty to see and do at the Highgate Harriers Night of the 10,000m PBs on Saturday (July 6) and it is not just about top-quality 25-lap track racing.

AW has a stand at the meeting where we will be selling our latest magazine. There is a question and answer session at 6pm with Liz McColgan, Andy Vernon and Bram Som, while the day also includes inter-schools relays and a Strava-sponsored mile.

Over at the Pro:Direct Running stand, meanwhile, there is the chance to test out and buy the Nike ZoomX Vaporfly NEXT% ahead of its official retail sale launch. You can also win a pair if you clock the fastest time on the night on a treadmill, or you can enter a draw to win a pair via a lottery.

In addition, Pro:Direct Running has organised a competition to win a trip to a Nike shoe launch event in St Moritz, Switzerland, at the end of this month where British elite athletes will be training at altitude ahead of the IAAF World Championships in Doha.

Nike ZoomX Vaporfly NEXT% costs £239.95 and was launched on the eve of the Virgin Money London Marathon in April. There, the shoe was worn by world record-holder Eliud Kipchoge and Britain’s Mo Farah, among others, with many club runners across the country keen to get their feet in a pair in the hope it will propel them to a PB.

We reviewed the shoe in April here and it features a new bright green or ‘phantom glow’ colour pattern with 15% more ZoomX foam in the midsole than its previous incarnation, together with a lighter upper made out of ‘Vaporweave’ plus, of course, the carbon fibre plate that gives the shoe its spring. With comfort in mind, laces are offset to the side to reduce pressure on the top of the foot and there is more padding to protect the Achilles.

Pop down to the Parliament Hill track next to Hampstead Heath on Saturday to watch the 10,000m races and test out the shoe and maybe buy or try to win a pair via Pro:Direct Running.

A look ahead to the European Mountain Running Championships in Zermatt, plus a preview to continental combined events action in Lutsk

Sarah Tunstall, who won individual silver last time this event was staged in its uphill format two years ago, heads Britain’s 16-strong team for the European Mountain Running Championships in Zermatt, Switzerland, on Sunday.

Joining recent trials champion Tunstall will be Rebecca Hilland, who was with her when Britain won team gold in 2017.

Former UK steeplechase record-holder Hatti Archer, who was 10th in the 2016 World Mountain Running Championships, and last year’s bronze winner Emma Gould complete a strong senior women’s team.

Trials winner Jacob Adkin will be joined in the GB men’s team by his coach, Robbie Simpson, the Commonwealth marathon bronze medallist, and Andrew Douglas, winner of the opening two stages of the World Mountain Running Cup this year.

The junior teams include 2018 International Youth Cup champion Matthew Mackay.

From an international point of view, Switzerland’s Maude Mathys will be chasing her third consecutive title as she runs on home soil in the shadow of the world-famous Matterhorn.

Challenging her will be Austria’s three-time winner Andrea Mayr, who has also won the world title six times and is an uphill specialist.

Recent world trail champion Blandine L’Hirondel of France will be dropping down in distance to 10.1km (1020m of ascent) – the juniors run 5.9km (448m+) – while Anais Sabrie of France will be looking to go one better than her silver of last year.

On the men’s side, Norway’s Johan Bugge, who was fifth and top European at last year’s Worlds, is among the top entrants.

Italy’s men include Cesare Maestri, runner-up last year and former world champions Xavier Chevrier and Martin Dematteis.

A live stream for the event can be found below, while start lists and results will be posted here.

European Combined Events Team Championships Super League

Great Britain placed fourth last time at the European Combined Events Team Championships Super League in 2017 and this weekend the team includes England champion John Lane and Commonwealth bronze medallist Jessica Taylor-Jemmett.

Taylor-Jemmett, who has scored 5663 in the heptathlon this year, will spearhead the team of four men and four women in Lutsk, Ukraine.

Lane, who tallied 7786 to win the national decathlon title in Bedford this year, was sixth in the 2018 Commonwealth Games on Australia’s Gold Coast.

Joining them on the team are Commonwealth Games representatives Ben Gregory and Katie Stainton, plus Andrew Murphy, Jo Rowland, Lewis Church and Ellen Barber.

Also look out for world indoor heptathlon bronze medallist Maicel Uibo and defending champion Janek Oiglane in the decathlon and 2011 European under-23 champion Grit Sadeiko in the heptathlon.

Cumulative scoring based on each country’s top three men and top three women will decide the outcome and hosts Ukraine will defend their title in the last ever edition of these championships.

A live stream for the event can be found below, while results will be posted here.