Well my heart rate has just about returned to normal following the thrilling finish to the Trent Bridge Test on Sunday. It truly was a wonderful match, encapsulating pretty much everything that is good about the modern game: fast scoring rates, capable lower order batting and a tendency for players to really wear their emotions on their sleeves. Comparisons with Edgbaston 2005 are wholly justified. As was the case eight years ago, I was in the middle of a match myself during the final throes of the tensest of Tests. I remember that day that no-one was paying any attention to our under 15s fixture, not even those who were on the field of play! The rest of us crowded round a tiny TV in the pavilion, nails shortening by the minute. Such was the effectiveness of Brett Lee and Michael Kasprowicz’s resistance that there was time for my match to finish, my kit to be hastily thrown into my bag, my dad to drive me (probably also quite hastily) home with TMS crackling through on Radio 4 LW and me to perch myself on the very edge of a living room chair, eyes transfixed on the much missed Ashes coverage on Channel 4 before England were able to claw themselves over the line.
It may be that I’m eight years older (and probably four years more mature), or that England are no longer weighed down by the dreadful Ashes record that preceded the 2005 win or even that England’s victory margin was seven times more comfortable, but for me Sunday didn’t conjure quite the same level of do-or-die, all-encompassing excitement as that fateful day did. What Sunday did do, however, was round off in spectacular fashion just about the perfect Test match.
It seemed to me that just about everything exciting that can happen in cricket, happened during the Trent Bridge Test. The only thing missing was probably a hat trick, although there were three opportunities for one in the game, so we can’t feel too hard done by. It is said that the best cricket occurs when the ball is slightly superior to the bat, and I feel that was the case here. Although conditions weren’t particularly helpful, and no batter covered themselves in glory for either side in the first innings, we did witness two superb displays of fast bowling from the under-rated Peter Siddle and the superlative James Anderson. These two showcased their craft at the highest quality and must be commended for it. Siddle is more known for his heart and Anderson for his skill, but each proved they had plenty of both. Two deliveries stick in the memory. Siddle’s perfectly pitched yorker to castle a well set Joe Root probably hasn’t received as much praise as it should. Perhaps if it was a Kevin Pietersen or an Alastair Cook that it dismissed then it might have, but it was a special ball produced when it was needed. Anderson surpassed that however, when Australia batted. The Burnley Express is capable of bowling magic balls with reasonable regularity and two stick in the memory. One a comprehensive cleaning up of the hapless VVS Laxman on India’s last tour here, the other an embarrassment of the unfortunate, and perennial pub quiz tie-breaker answer, Australian stand-in wicket-keeper Graham Manou during the 2009 Ashes. His dismissal of Michael Clarke however, raised the bar even higher. Not just for the quality of the batter in question, but the narrower the margins involved. Clarke appeared to be covering all angles with his competent looking defensive push, but Anderson managed to sneak to ball past so it just shaved the off stump. A terrific delivery and one that will surely been replayed time and time again, in Anderson’s dreams and Clarke’s nightmares.
Although from a personal point of view, I relished this spectacle of skilful fast bowling more, the major talking point following the match was the meteoric rise out of the blue of Ashton Agar. The teenager’s debut innings was a perfectly scripted story within a perfectly scripted story. His team’s innings was in tatters as he walked to the crease, yet he set about batting with the nerveless enjoyment that perhaps can only be there on a player’s debut. As he began to get into his stride and play some accomplished proper cricket shots I was put in mind of a club game. Not because of the standard of cricket, but the gradual realisation that this young lad coming in at number 11 could bat, and bat well. Joyous would be the one word I would sum his innings up with. Even when he was tragically but perfectly out on 98, he allowed himself a smile that was tinged with only the tiniest bit of regret. Whether Agar goes on to have a successful career or disappears like the legion of Australia spinners before him he will always be remembered for that innings that displayed the best qualities youth can bring to the art of batting.
The events of last week gave us a real box office start to this year of Ashes cricket and we would be foolish not to expect that tomorrow’s second Test at Lord’s will continue in the same vein. Although Trent Bridge answered plenty of questions, most notably the one of whether or not Australia will be competitive, it also threw up many additional questions of its own.
For England, it is a question concerned with selection, and it is a tricky one to answer. Steven Finn’s place as the third seamer is certainly in a lot of jeopardy. We saw the best and the worst of Finn in the first Test. In his first spell in Australia’s first innings he looked at his unplayable best, steaming in, bowling at pace in the right areas and proving himself a genuine wicket-taking threat. In contrast, his final spell of the match was two overs of the worst panicky, rabbit-in-the-headlights type of bowling synonymous with many a young England seamer thrown in at the deep end in the 90s. When a player is struggling, normally the problems have their roots in one or more of the four key coaching areas: physical, mental, tactical and technical. Finn is physically in excellent shape and, whereas a fair few people have criticised Finn’s technique pointing to his infamous and now hopefully forgotten habit of kicking the stumps over, for me his technique is fine and the primary reason for his struggles is a real lack of confidence. It may be that England are using his attributes wrongly in their bowling plans, but whatever line and length he is attempting to bowl, he doesn’t seem to run in with any conviction. Surely then, if that is the issue, the best way to fix it would be to show faith in him by giving him a starting spot tomorrow and to drop him would be to further dent his already visibly diminished self-belief.
A factor firmly in Finn’s favour is the venue for the second Test. Not only is Lord’s his home ground, but his record there is impressive for both Middlesex and England. When a bowler is feeling under the pump, how comfortable he feels playing at a ground takes on greater significance. The two possible replacements for Finn are Tim Bresnan and Graham Onions, who both have contrasting records at Lord’s. Although he is perceived to be the favourite to replace Finn, Bresnan’s record is pretty dismal whereas Onions’ is very reasonable indeed. Understandable when the bowling styles of the three are considered. Onions and Finn rely more on seam movement, something which the Lord’s slope assists greatly, whereas Bresnan’s forte is swing. His batting shouldn’t be a factor in the decision, given the strength of England’s top six and the inevitable presence of Broad and Graeme Swann in the lower order. Both Onions and Bresnan have clearly been affected by injuries, but the vibe is that England trust Bresnan more, perhaps due to his contributions to the one day team. It doesn’t help that Onion’s last England appearance was a pretty chastening one at the hand of the West Indies last year.
One additional knock on effect of dropping Finn is that, with England losing his pace and bounce, it may be that the team will look to Stuart Broad to alter his bowling to replicate that of Finn. They like having variety in their attack and, regardless of whether it be Bresnan or Onions who comes in, it wouldn’t be a like for like replacement, although Bresnan’s natural length is perhaps similar. Therefore the fact that England haven’t included the likes of Chris Tremlett or Boyd Rankin in their squad may be a concealed hint that Finn will retain his place, or that may be reading too much into it. Back to the Broad issue, the enforcer role is one that he has attempted manfully in the past, but it is abundantly clear that not only is he definitely not suited to it, but he is often potent when he pitches the ball up looking for swing. Whether consciously or sub-consciously, I can envisage Broad being drawn to that back-of-a-length length in the absence of Finn, and it being to his, and England’s detriment.
In my opinion, it is worth persisting with Finn on his home ground. He may be slightly mercurial at the moment, which isn’t ideal in a four man attack, but the Lord’s factor swings it in his favour for me. There is a perception around that every Yorkshireman wants Bresnan in the team come what may, but this isn’t true. I, along with the GLY (Greatest Living Yorkshireman) Geoff Boycott, would rather Onions come into the team if Finn were to be dropped, his superior record at Lord’s and his better suited bowling style being the deciding factors here. In truth, I believe England won’t go along with me, as well they might. I expect Finn to be dropped in favour of Bresnan. They like to put out in the media that they aren’t a ruthless team in terms of selection, but that masks the truth somewhat in my opinion. Just ask Monty Panesar, Nick Compton, James Taylor and arguably Onions himself. The bowling coach David Saker has always had very apparent reservations, or maybe frustrations, about Finn for whatever reason and he will perhaps be more vulnerable to the chop than the norm whilst Saker is there.
For Australia, it has once again been off the field events that have dominated their preparations, but as I said in my last post, it is the cricket itself that will be of the only concern in this series. Selection-wise, the only player at real risk is Ed Cowan, who was disappointing at Trent Bridge. For me, it is not a question of whether he belongs in the team, just that fact that he is not a number three. That position is arguably the most important in the batting line up and Cowan isn’t suited to it. I would personally move him up to open and drop Chris Rogers into the crucial number three spot. Cowan would be more comfortable in his usual opener’s role, it would give Australia a handy left right hand combination at the top of the order, and with Rogers having played plenty of cricket at Lord’s with Middlesex, a move one place down shouldn’t affect him greatly. Again, I don’t believe this will happen, as Australia very deliberately set out their stall before the series by naming their opening pair. To change it one match into the series would be a rare admission of a mistake by an international cricket team.

The Battles That Will Win The War

It feels as though England have been playing cricket almost constantly this year. In fact, England have played 45 days worth of competitive cricket this year, or in more relatable terms, almost a quarter of the year so far. All this cricket however, whether it be the intense and nerve-wracking Champion’s Trophy final or the instantly forgettable recent T20 series against New Zealand, has just been one enormous aperitif to the mouth-watering bumper main course that is the Ashes. As with any modern Ashes series, the build-up started pretty much as soon as the previous series finished, and the recent climax to the build-up has been characterised by selection dilemmas, off-the-field incidents and bold predictions by pundits from both sides. All these will pale into relative insignificance once the first ball in bowled tomorrow however, and for the next seven weeks, the final destination of that most coveted of urns will be decided by the actualities of the cricket. How leather impacts willow. Whether two hands can grasp a crucial catch. A momentary lapse in a batsman’s concentration. Here, I outline what I believe to be the three key battles that will decide the Ashes.

1. Alastair Cook v Mitchell Starc

No one would dream of questioning Alastair Cook’s batting pedigree. Indeed, the England captain is on the cusp of graduating from the very good to the great in the pantheon of English batters. He is approaching both thirty Test hundreds and a century of Test caps at a canter, and the ascension to the captaincy appears to have further galvanised his batting. However, and this may prove to be an important however, he does have a weakness against left arm seam that is no longer just perceived, but apparent and verifiable. It is a trait that, like many others, he has in common with his predecessor and former opening partner Andrew Strauss. I must admit I find it bizarre that such a weakness could exist, given they are both left handers. Kevin Pietersen is notoriously weak against left arm spin, a vulnerability that is understandable from a technical point of view given that the ball is turning away from his bat. The left arm seam to left handed batter configuration is surely analogous to a right arm seam to right handed batter configuration, undoubtedly the most common duel seen in cricket outside the subcontinent. If a right handed opener had a weakness to right arm seam, well, it’s fairly obvious he wouldn’t be around for long. Why then, is Cook frail against the mirror image of this often seen combination? It may be that left armers are comparatively rare so exposure to, and thus practice against them is reduced, but I believe the root cause of Cook’s flaw is technical. His tendency to plant the front foot early and play around the pad that took him to the verge of being dropped three years ago has been, if not totally ironed out, at least tempered substantially. The relics of this however, are brought into sharp relief against left armers, given the difference in both angle and release point.
The young, exciting and talented Trent Boult got him in both innings at the Lord’s Test earlier in the summer, as well as twice in the series in New Zealand. Neil Wagner, a less heralded left arm quick, also got him twice in that same series. Australia have a left armer with an even greater reputation than Boult in Mitchell Starc. I personally have been more impressed by Boult given his greater control and wider skillset. It would be fair to say that Starc has an extra yard of pace and more of the ‘X-Factor’ than his Kiwi counterpart however. I fully expect him to share the new ball, and for the proactive captaincy of Michael Clarke to come to the for as he explicitly targets the England captain with his unpredictable but undoubtedly dangerous young left armer. Graeme Swann spoke recently about ‘cutting the head off the serpent’ with regards to Clarke. If Clarke and Starc can exploit this flaw to remove the heavy-scoring head of the English serpent, it will go a long way towards reducing England to a manageable total.

2. Michael Clarke v Graeme Swann

If there is one player on either side that is most ‘up’ for this series, then it is Graeme Swann. The off-spinner has not been backward in coming forward about his excitement about the Ashes and his fervent desire to win them. Although he hasn’t said it in so many words, it is clear to any observer that he wishes to create a ‘legacy’ this year through his own personal performances, as well as the team’s. At 34, and with the injury-ridden year he has had, it is obvious that he is, if not part way through, at least entering the autumn of his career. He is, however, well placed to have himself a glorious Indian summer. An expected prolonged period of very dry weather coupled with the plethora of left-handed batters that he so enjoys in the Australian lineup will have Swann licking his lips. Indeed it is hardly surprising he is so riddled with excitement for the summer ahead. There may well be a nasty fly in his ointment however, in the shape of Michael Clarke. Not only is he a dastardly right hander, but he is also an extremely fine player of spin bowling, of all kinds. Swann may well chew up and spit out the left handers at the other end, but a Clarke who has got himself in against the seamers will be a very different proposition. Now given the conditions and circumstances Swann will be expected to be more attacking in this series, in contrast to the holding role he normally plays in England, and it is likely that Cook will be inclined to generally set more aggressive fields accordingly. This, along with the fact that Clarke doesn’t really have an obvious weakness against spin, could prove problematic for Swann. The automatic reaction would be to attempt to tie Clarke up and restrict his scoring to try and lure him into a rash shot or a lapse in concentration. This will be easier said than done for three reasons. Firstly, Clarke’s nimble footwork and confidence against spin allow him to manufacture a reasonable amount of runs against defensive fields. Secondly, the increased expectation put on his shoulders since both becoming captain and losing Ricky Ponting and Michael Hussey from the batting unit has made him a more responsible and focused player than he was in either of the last two Ashes series. Finally, given the abundance of left handers in the Australian lineup, it is more than likely that there will be one at the other end from Clarke and that Swann will be bowling aggressively to whomever it is. Switching from an attacking to a containing line, field and mentality often plays havoc with a bowler’s execution of his skills. No, it is fair to say that Clarke will be the most likely spoiler of Swann’s planned party, and the off-spinner will have to be at his most wily if he is to stop him.

3. Kevin Pietersen v Everyone

A self-confessed big match player, and the owner of the most ‘X-Factorness’ on either side, the performance of Kevin Pietersen will have a huge bearing on the outcome of the series. It is no secret that, like Swann, Pietersen is pumped for the Ashes. Indeed, the former alluded to just how excited the latter his in his recent Sun column. Like his captain, Pietersen is another England player on the verge of greatness. There are many who would claim that he is already there, but I prefer to leave him on greatness’ doorstep because, as was said on the most recent episode of ESPNCricinfo’s Switch Hit podcast, Pietersen is a better player when he has something to prove. There is no doubt in my mind that he is the most talented and exciting batter on the planet at the minute. You can throw names like Jayawardene, Amla and Kohli into the mix, along with the two captains contesting the Ashes this year, but ask me whether I would rather see each of this score a hundred, or watch a single Pietersen century and I would pick the latter every time. When that talent manifests itself, he is virtually unstoppable and his only enemy is himself.
What, or rather who, then stands in the way of that special talent coming to the fore? Well, it is well documented that, for all their failings, Australia have a strong and potentially potent bowling attack. I have already sang the praises of Starc, but James Pattinson is perhaps even more impressive, and the backup seamers are competent too. Pattinson, though young, has ego and the traditional aggressive streak that has often typified great Australian teams of the past, and is perhaps missing from some of his teammates. The thought of a pumped-up Pattinson bowling to Pietersen is a mouth-watering one, as the latter will not take kindly to the sight of an ego that could potentially threaten his own and will consequently attempt to take the former down a peg or too in his own brutal way. If he manages, the results will be catastrophic for Australia but, as is often the case, one’s greatest strength is also one’s greatest weakness. If Pietersen allows his ego to run away with him, England’s key game-changing weapon will be nullified.
A couple of perceived irresponsible Pietersen dismissals will also refuel criticism aimed at his from off the field. Whilst I said in the introduction that on field events are ultimately where the Ashes will be decided, Pietersen’s game often transcends the field of play, meaning his performance is capable of being affected from outside. Also, regardless of the claimed successful ‘reintegration’ and the constant stream of Pietersen-friendly soundbites that emanate from the England camp, we would be foolish to imagine all the water is totally under the bridge. It may not be as fragile as it was this time last year, but Pietersen’s position in the dressing room, and how it changes throughout the summer, will have a huge impact on his performance, and England’s performance as a whole

I Told You So...

In between the looks of excitement following England's astonishing victory this afternoon, and those of guilt that I am currently writing this instead of revising for my exam tomorrow, I feel I can afford myself a slightly self-satisfied smirk. My venture into writing about cricket is still in its infancy, yet most of my thoughts and predictions about the nature of the First Test have been vindicated. I am not preparing for a phone call from TMS, Sky or one of the broadsheets quite yet, but I am nevertheless rather pleased with myself at this decent start.
Any slim journalistic ambitions of mine however, pale into insignificance next to the cricket itself. What an extraordinary end to an absorbing match! I think the only people who can feel aggrieved are those who planned to come to Lord's tomorrow, and perhaps the whole of New Zealand. Although inevitably shorted, low-scoring games are, in my opinion, much better for the spectator. The course of the match can change within the blink of an eye, momentum swings from one side to another like a demented grandfather clock and for the players themselves, there a plenty of golden opportunities to be a hero. If New Zealand hadn't imploded quite so

rapidly, and the margin of victory had been correspondingly slimmer, we would have been saying that Joe Root was the crucial difference between the sides. The Yorkshireman not only compiled the highest individual innings score of the match yesterday, but was the only player on either side to finish with a match aggregate of over 100 (the next best was the unflappable Jonathan Trott, with 95). As he has done for his international career so far, he batted in both innings of this match with a maturity and confidence beyond his years. The only thing I would say is that he and Trott need to seriously work on their running between the wickets together! In all seriousness, when Root makes his debut international hundred, it will be a special moment indeed.
Although he won't have minded in the slightest, Root at the limelight taken from him by a rampant Stuart Broad. I backed Broad before the Test, not so much to score runs, but certainly to take wickets. I felt, although others thought otherwise, that he bowled reasonably well in the first innings.

Indeed, his first spell I believe matched that of James Anderson's. Broad is becoming slightly mercurial, which is not such a bad thing. Any team is made stronger by having a bowler who can runs through teams like Broad did today, even if they don't do it every match. It wouldn't be an attribute quite so desirable if it wasn't perfectly complimented by Anderson's reliability though. I sung his praises vigorously in my last post, and he yet again reaffirmed his credentials today, although perhaps lived up to the 'Unlucky' moniker I gave him by having playing second fiddle to Broad in the deciding innings of the match.
With regards to the batting, I feel I scored a massive hit with Alastair Cook. The England captain was dismissed twice in the match by left-armer Trent Boult and, although you could argue his second innings dismissal was uncharacteristically lazy, he never really looked comfortable against the wiry paceman. On the other hand, I backed his opening partner Nick Compton and Ian Bell, and neither made a real contribution (Compton a match aggregate of 31, Bell 37). We can forgive Bell I think, as he was suffering from flu for most of the match and as for Compton, whatever you say about a gate between bat and pad, the ball he got in the second innings was a gem and would have got better players than himself out. The way he got out in the first innings was odd though. It is perhaps the first time in his career to date he has got himself out in a lackadaisical fashion. Also, whilst I said he would be more relaxed at the crease playing in England, it appears he isn't. If I was the England management, I would give him some reassurance with regards to his place in the team, as he still looks tense. Some aspersions have also been cast on the performance of Jonny Bairstow, somewhat unjustly in my opinion. He top-scored in the first innings after all, and was unfortunate in both his dismissal and in the fact that by the time he was 'in' he was batting with the tail. Both he and Root certainly looked relaxed at the crease anyway.
Moving to the New Zealand camp and, although my assertion that Peter Fulton would struggle in England was perhaps on the verge of stating the obvious, it was nevertheless vindicated. He never looked particularly comfortable for any of the 31 balls he faced in the match and, if he doesn't improve on his match aggregate of three at Headingley, he will be looking apprehensively over his shoulder for Martin Guptill. Test cricket can be a cruel game when you're thirty four. Another who appeared way out of his depth was Dean Brownlie, who may be getting in the team on account of his excellent slip catching at the moment. I confess I was woefully wrong about Hamish Rutherford and Kane Williamson however. Rutherford comes from the Tillakaratne Dilshan/Virender Sehwag/Tamim Iqbal school of opening batters, so is a bit all or nothing. It

could well be that he blazes a magnificent hundred on Friday morning. Williamson, on the other hand, I must alter my opinion of. The technical difficulties I spoke of previously seemed to be absent for most of his innings and he was got out first time around in an unfortunate way, caught down the leg side. Whilst Headingley will, in all likelihood, test his technique more than Lord's, I now would back him to succeed and score more runs. His ball to get rid of Trott yesterday was Graeme Swann-esque too, and he has come out of the match with his stock enhanced. Not so Bruce Martin. New Zealand's specialist spinner only took one wicket in the match, which was essentially gifted to him by Compton, and bowled some really filthy long hops with alarming regularity. With his injury, it may be that this is now an easier decision to make for the New Zealand selectors, but I expect Doug Bracewell to play in his place at Headingley, something I was an advocate of for this Test.
Well, I have calmed down now following a thrilling half day of Test cricket, once again proving that this is without a doubt the best format of the game for spectators and players alike and must return to revision. It has certainly ended up being an explosive start to the international summer, and I'm already looking forward to it continuing on Friday.

The Good, The Bad and The Unlucky

One day of cricket. Three contrasting days for three different England bowlers: Tim Bresnan, Steven Finn and James Anderson.

Pride of place in this article, and in cricketing headlines around the world tomorrow, must go to James Anderson. The Burnley Express took his 300th Test wicket at Lord's today, and quickly took his overall tally to 301. He could have had 302 had Matt Prior uncharacteristically dropped Kane Williamson on 23. Not only for that reason but others too, Anderson has acquired the moniker of 'Unlucky' here. One recurring theme that I have noticed in Anderson's Test renaissance over the last five years or so is a

lack of luck. A common club cricket phrase uttered by wise old veterans and eager young prodigies alike is 'shit gets wickets'. Although Anderson rarely bowls any 'shit' these days, even precious few of his late order/tail end wickets are from poor balls. He hardly ever benefits from the batter's generosity either. In this respect, it may be an unfortunate repercussion of his deserved fearsome reputation around the world that batters are reluctant to take liberties with him. Anderson appears to be perenially bereft of luck. His magnificent, unplayable, but ultimately unrewarded spell of bowling to Michael Hussey on the third day of the first 10/11 Ashes Test is rapidly becoming stuff of legend. Superbly skilful yet agonisingly futile, Anderson became noticeablely increasingly frustrated and disbelieving as he watched Hussey play and miss, and again, and again, and again. Some of his spells today held echoes of Brisbane, and he can feel aggreived not not have taken his wicket tally to withing a few of Fred Trueman's.

Anderson may also feel aggreived at the possible percieved lack of support he was given by his fellow seamers, in particularly Steven Finn. I cast aspersions on Finn's form in my previous post, although not strongly enough that I can feel smugness with any validity, but he did bowl poorly today. Inevitably, Finn chooses the moment I am writing this to take the wicket of Dean Brownlie, but I retain my criticism. At the risk of stating the obvious, the wicket came from a full delivery, which were a rarity to see when Finn was bowling throughout the day. May + England + wet weather should equal full bowling. It's not rocket science. I have to say I can sympathise with Finn a little. Although tiny compared to the 6'7" Finn, I am taller than most of the people I play cricket with or against. I often find myself erring on the short side when bowling, and struggling to pitch it up even if that is what I'm trying to do. Having said that, I am a club trundler, Finn is an international professional, so the sympathy stops there. It was a Bad day for the Middlesex quick, who is clearly better than what he showed today.

Finn's rival for a place in the starting XI was also in action today, and my, what a Good day he had. Tim Bresnan was released by England to join Yorkshire in their match against Warwickshire. Although it may have been that they didn't require the burly all-rounders services, if nothing else he hastened the White Rose's comprehensive innings victory over the champions. On an Edgbaston wicket where scoring fluent runs was reportedly difficult, he made a robust 38 in support of Adil Rashid, who finished Yorkshire's innings on an unbeaten second Championship century of the season, heightening the, admittedly slim, chances of an England recall. He then made the best possible start to his bowling outing, trapping Varun Chopra lbw with the first ball of Warwickshire's second innings. He then picked up Darren Maddy and Tom Milnes later on to complete a trio of seamers with three wickets each as Yorkshire romped home. He appears to be back to his best and the England selectors may have a few rueful smiles on their faces. Bresnan meanwhile, will have one as broad as his shoulders, as he savours Yorkshire's ascension to the top of the table.

Before the Lord Mayor's show?

England Test matches in May tend to go down two routes. Either the weather plays the villainous lead and the match tends to peter out into a dull rain-affected draw, or the weather plays an intriguing yet subtle hand by providing juicy pitches that bowlers relish and that produce absorbing, thrilling and ultimately competitive cricket, where batters are forced to score some proper runs and the course of the match can alter rapidly, as we witnessed in 2011 where a ruthless England attack produced a sparkling performance on the final day to rout a rabbit-in-the-headlights-esque Sri Lanka at Cardiff. Unfortunately given the British weather currently, we may be in for the former route over the next five days, but we can live in hope. If we do get a series where play is possible on most days however, it could prove to be a fascinating one.
Another curse that often affects early season Test matches is that they tend to get overlooked by public and press alike. Usually the series is shorted and against a supposedly lesser team. Add the A-word in and you could be forgiven for realising this series is actually taking place. But it is. And not only should it throw up questions in its own right, but answer some that have already been asked. Let us first consider the tourists.
New Zealand are a team that are perennially said to be greater than the sum of their parts, a moniker that is not without justification. Their strongest part at the moment is undoubtedly their fast bowling attack and it is for this reason that they will be relishing a series that could well be played on cooperative wickets. Trent Boult is clearly the current pack leader. Whilst Tim Southee is more experienced and arguably more skillful, Boult holds the advantages of being a shade quicker, more of an unknown quantity and, most crucially, a left-armer. It is that last parameter that could give him the edge over England's top order, particularly Alastair Cook. Like many left-handers paradoxically have had, he has had not inconsiderable problems with left-armers in the past and, whilst we have got used to him scoring runs for fun, he is only human (I think) and, in good old-fashioned England fan style, I say he is due a lean series. The backup seamers are useful too. In New Zealand, the Barmy Army were charmed first by Neil Wagner's surname, then by his bustling, whole-hearted approach to bowling. The general consensus is that he is ahead of Doug Bracewell for the third paceman's spot but, having watched a bit of Bracewell bowling against South Africa, I would be tempted to go with a four man pace attack and leave out Bruce Martin. It would be slightly harsh on Martin, who outbowled his opposite number Monty Panesar in the recent series, but he was poor on the final day in Auckland and besides, a move like picking a four man pace attack would be more in keeping with Brendon McCullum's progressive style of captaincy. I feel Bracewell would offer as much with the bat as Martin and, to cap it off, New Zealand's number three and part time offspinner Kane Williamson actually has more Test wickets at a lower average than Martin.
Williamson neatly brings me to the batting, which is a trickier puzzle to solve. They are a team that has been rolled for double figure scores by quality pace attacks recently, and it is not too much to imagine that something similar could happen here. Indeed, in a two-match, possibly to be rain-affected series, one innings where the batting implodes could be the difference between an impressive series drawn and a disappointing series lost. Six months ago, the New Zealand selectors will not have had Peter Fulton in their provisional starting XI for this Test match, but his twin hundreds in Auckland have given the thirty four year old opener the chance to have a decent crack of the whip. Nevertheless, we can't ignore the fact he has an ugly stance and technique that leads to an unconvincing uncertainty around off stump. Against an England attack at home, hungry for some personal revenge, with Duke ball in hand and in swinging conditions, you have to expect that he will come a cropper. His opening partner, Hamish

Rutherford, on the other hand, has acquitted himself well with English conditions, and the signs are that he could be the key player for New Zealand. He scores his runs quickly, and in potentially low scoring matches, quick runs take on greater significance, a fact true of the Black Caps captain. His bullish and inventive captaincy will be less important in conditions best exploited by doing the basics right. His bullish and inventive attitude however, will be of paramount importance. In a young team with few 'characters' he will need to be the main galvanising force on the field. That is not to discount the contribution Ross Taylor will no doubt make to that area, but he will know that the best way he can assert himself on the team is by scoring big runs. He does have valuable experience of doing this in England but whether he does this or not I feel largely depends on the England bowlers. If they bowl short on these wickets, he will be savage. If they bowl full well, who knows. The rest of the batting order comprises of three players (Williamson, Dean Brownlie and wicketkeeper BJ Watling) who have each played fighting Test innings showing a mental maturity beyond their experience, but still possess technical flaws that I fear will be realised on this tour. It could be that I am proved wrong, but I honestly can't envisage more than one of them making a sizeable contribution.
My New Zealand starting XI for tomorrow would therefore be:
Peter Fulton
Hamish Rutherford
Kane Williamson
Ross Taylor
Dean Brownlie
Brendon McCullum (c)
BJ Watling (wk)
Tim Southee
Doug Bracewell
Neil Wagner
Trent Boult


Now I turn my attention to England. As a team, as a batting unit, as a bowling group and as other cliches as well, they will be confident. All teams are more confident when at home, but England more than most. The bowlers in particular will be chomping at the bit to get out in the middle. In New Zealand their initial confidence turned to frustration through puzzlement and annoyance , and ended up somewhere near grumpiness. None more so than for James

Anderson. The Lancashire quick is deadly at home, more because he has a Duke ball rather than because of the pitches, and will be keen to return his record against New Zealand to its previous excellence, and pass 300 Test wickets along the way. I am backing him to shine in this series, and at Headingley he has a good chance to go one better than his previous best Test figures.
His new ball partner will be, and should be, Stuart Broad. Broad retains his double-edged knack of taking wickets in clusters. This, allied to his fiery, sometimes childish, temper leads observers to periodically call for his head. England will definitely have him penciled in as a key player over this bumper summer of cricket though. His confidence should be high, and he will see this series as an opportunity to pick up some wickets and reaffirm his status in the eyes of the public as England's second best paceman.
The last two bowling spots (I think we all can accept that England will continue to pick six batters for the foreseeable future) will be filled by a combination of Graeme Swann, Tim Bresnan and Steven Finn. Whilst I have said I would be an advocate of a four man New Zealand attack, I believe we can all perish any thought of Swann not playing. They missed each of his three facets terribly in New Zealand and, whilst his form for Notts hasn't been exactly sparkling, indications are that his elbow isn't proving detrimental to his game as it did last year. Although the pitches may not be particularly conducive to spin, but nevertheless one of the key cogs in this remarkably successful England team will return, and they will be more dangerous for it.
That leaves Bresnan and Finn for the final spot and as to who it will be, well my guess is as good as yours. Finn is 'the man in possession' but has taken only seven wickets in his three first class matches for Middlesex this season, at an average approaching forty. Not exactly great

form. He is also reportedly going back to his longer run up, a sign that he himself is not comfortable with his game. Bresnan, on the other hand, has shown solid if unspectacular form for Yorkshire so far, taking thirteen wickets at twenty seven in his three matches and his return may shake up an England attack that was starting to look flat in New Zealand. The selectors will bear in mind that his is also returning from injury, and they may not want to risk him and Swann coming back in the same match. Like I said, I believe it is too close to call but secretly hope that Finn gets the nod. After all, that would mean Bresnan would return to the Yorkshire team currently playing Warwickshire. Although it appears they may not need him!
The trio of Cook, Trott and Bell are a reassuring presence in the England batting lineup and, whilst I stated that Cook may struggle against Boult, the other two are in good form for their county. In fact, they are being sorely missed at the moment (yes, I couldn't resist mentioning it again)! In all seriousness, I am backing them both to score runs. The same goes for Nick Compton. The Somerset opener has had to wait seven Tests before making his home debut and will be extremely confident going into it. Whilst his first two Test hundreds will still be fresh in his mind, mentally he will be casting his mind back to early last season, where he was scoring runs for fun in tricky conditions. He may well have to do something similar tomorrow morning. He knows now that he can do it and that he 'belongs'. He needs to retain the intensity that served him so well in unfamiliar Indian conditions, but will naturally relax playing on a familiar Lord's pitch. I think his game will be better for it.
There isn't much to say about Matt Prior to be honest, other than I'm glad he exists. Sandwiched between England's recently named player of the year and the top four, however, lies the most fascinating area of the team. The two Yorkshire youngsters, Joe Root and Jonny Bairstow, will occupy places five and six, with myriad subplots encircling them. The first thing to say is that the pair of them are in superb form. Joe Root, especially, will have never batted better. Three scores of 179 or more, along with a scarcely noticeable second ball duck, in his last four games mean his confidence will be higher going into this Test than any of his previous four. Bairstow meanwhile, looks to be getting back to somewhere approaching his free-flowing best. The second important point is that the pair of them like batting together. A sizeable partnership against the New Zealanders and an enormous one against Derbyshire mean that we can curb our panic should England find themselves at 40-4 at some point with the two rookies at the crease. The bigger picture with regards to this of course concerns the Ashes (oh no I've said it!). Assuming Kevin Pietersen returns, which is likely, from some angles Root and Bairstow could be seen as engaging in a winner takes all shoot-out for that number six spot. Matters would be complicated if both (or neither) score runs though, with other possible scenarios presenting themselves. I won't go into them now as it mainly concerns the Ashes. Let it just be said that even the most Pimms-sodden MCC members will be watching the two Yorkshiremen at the crease intently.

My England starting XI for tomorrow would therefore be:
Alastair Cook (c)
Nick Compton
Jonathan Trott
Ian Bell
Joe Root
Jonny Bairstow
Matt Prior (wk)
Stuart Broad
Graeme Swann
Steven Finn
James Anderson

Blooming White Rose?

The first few blows struck in the opening bouts of the County Championship are traditionally rather soft, ineffective ones. Early season, the rain and the rustiness of the players often combine to produce rather dull draws. The opening few games of the 2013 season, however, have been bereft of damp squibs, certainly in Division One. Middlesex's much-vaunted fast bowling attack showed their pedigree by rolling Derbyshire for 60 after conceding a first-innings deficit, Warwickshire's seamers did something similar by knocking over Durham for 94, and Durham themselves have today pulled off a stunning victory over Nottinghamshire by brutally chasing down 183 in 20 overs and 2 balls on the final evening. If there's one team in Division One that have really caught the eye, however, then its Yorkshire.
After getting thumped by and innings in a dismal first outing against Sussex, Yorkshire's last two matches have seen them complete two of their most remarkable victories in living memory. An extraordinarily successful chase of 336 at the Riverside preceded an innings victory over Derbyshire that not many would have predicted following Derbyshire's first innings total of 475. These two wins see them sitting, not exactly pretty, but certainly confidently, joint second in the table, and will give the Yorkshire faithful belief, not that they needed it, that they can bring the Championship back to its (rightful) place in their sesquicentennial (yes I had to look that up) year.
Although I was born closer to the Riverside than Headingley, and have lived for most of the past five years within half an hours bus journey of Old Trafford, my home town is in North Yorkshire therefore count myself as a Yorkshireman and, most importantly, support the White Rose. Yorkshire is a funny concept within not just English cricket culture, but English culture in general. Of all regional stereotypes, there is none that is so accurate, or indeed so readily accepted by the target, than that of the Yorkshireman. A Scotsman would frown at being described as being a drunkard, and who can forget the Cockney Harry Redknapp's angry retort at being accused of being a 'wheeler-dealer'. Accuse a Yorkshireman of being stubborn, tight and plain-speaking and he will agree, often with a hint of pride. I'm not sure about whippets, but Yorkshiremen who wear flat caps do so without irony. Yorkshire is also irreversibly synonymous with cricket. Perhaps it is the abundant greenery, or the attritional, determined nature of the game, but it is true that the hills, dales and valleys of God's Own County are awash with cricket grounds. From the ones found in the tiniest villages, where daisies grow in abundance, horses occasionally make an appearance at cow corner and it is a constant cause of astonishment that the opposition can actually make up a team from their population, to the affluent, comfortably middle-class club grounds of Guisborough and Harrogate, where eager parents watch their offspring, resplendent in brand new whites and kit. Famous names from Yorkshire grace the lists of both high-achieving England players - Hedley Verity, Geoff Boycott, Herbert Sutcliffe - and particularly under the mantle of captain - Len Hutton, Brian Close, Michael Vaughan. It is perhaps not surprising then, that Yorkshire are the most successful of the eighteen first class counties, with thirty one Championship wins, twelve better than their nearest rivals Surrey. It has been over a decade since their last win though, but this Yorkshire side look galvanised and convinced they can celebrate their return to Division One with a 32nd Championship win.
Okay, everything looks and sounds rosy for them so far, but look at the scorecards for those two wins and you will see they were built for a large part on the performances of their two young, star, but most importantly incrementally contracted, batsmen, Jonny Bairstow and Joe Root. Partially-forgotten man Tim Bresnan also played an not inconsiderable part either. It is doubtless that in this quite heady summer of international cricket, these three players will be highly involved. Yorkshire's season could well rest on both how many matches those three can play, and more importantly how the team manages in their absence. In fact, it is conceivable that Yorkshire will be missing their England trio for all their remaining Championship games, so how will they cope?
Bresnan, for all his doubtless quality and the valuable contributions he makes, will be the least missed of the three. Imports Jack Brooks and Liam Plunkett seem to be acquitting themselves well, and no-one could argue that they aren't decent Division One quality seamers. Add in the experience of Ryan Sidebottom, the potential of Moin Ashraf and the willingness of Steven Patterson and there is a pace battery that will be potent at best and mediocre at worst. No, it is the loss of Root and Bairstow that will have management and fans alike nervously drumming their fingers.

A smaller, but worrying yet not unexpected spanner has been thrown into the works by the international recognition of Gary Ballance. Anyone who has watched the young Zimbabwe-born batsman play will say that this is not before time. Plenty of young Indian batters have first class averages of over fifty, but that is in the Ranji Trophy where the pitches are flat and the balls uncooperative. To maintain a 50+ average in the County Championship, as Ballance as done, is a truly commendable achievement. He has the ability to quickly and drastically alter the course of an innings or a match, a la Jonny Bairstow, Matt Prior and (whisper it) Kevin Pietersen. I am in no doubt that Ballance will make some sort of England debut this summer, though probably not in Test cricket, putting even greater strain on Yorkshire's middle order. The management, and Ballance himself, will know he has to perform when he plays if Yorkshire are to lift the title.
Who then, will be required to really step up in that batting line-up? In my opinion it is three players that once, and perhaps still do, harbour England ambitions: Adam Lyth, Joe Sayers and, in particular, Andrew Gale. Whilst Gale has proved himself an intelligent and effective captain, the sort lion-hearted players want to serve well, he will know he needs to score heavily this season. Lyth has talent, and Sayers the mindset, but they need to convert their key attributes into runs and, possibly more importantly, time at the crease. There are some fine sides in Division One and it may be that Yorkshire's route to the title will encompass some grinding out of draws against the likes of Warwickshire and Nottinghamshire. One thing is for sure, the top six cannot continue to rely on Phil Jacques as much as they have in recent years.
The final word on Yorkshire's squad must go to Adil Rashid. With an imperious fifth first class century in the ongoing Somerset fixture, the signs are there that this could be the season that the mercurial leg-spinning all-rounder finds his feet once again. Still only twenty-five, he will have a place back in that England side firmly in his mind. Whilst the route to it may not be currently clear, scoring runs and taking wickets to take Yorkshire to the title would be a fine path to go down.
It may be that this is all wildly ambitious postulates, and Yorkshire will embark on a downwards spiral culminating in an end-of-season relegation scrap. The competitive and unpredictable nature of the Championship attracts this sort of speculation however, so I make no apologies. Yorkshire's last game is against Surrey at the Oval, scene of many a dramatic end to an English international summer. Currently, there is no more satisfying vision for me than that of Andrew Gale holding aloft the champagne-soaked trophy on a hot September's evening in Central London. Currently, that image is not too far-fetched.

'What Do You Mean A Thrilling Draw?'

With England not playing again till mid-May and the start of the county season looking to be not so much a damp squib as a frozen one, doubtless I will be rewatching one of my Ashes DVDs over the next few weeks to get my cricket fix. I own DVDs of the past three series, that's 10/11, 09 and 05 (edit: apparently there was a series in 06/07. I dispute this.), and during the famous Edgbaston Test of 05 Mark Nicholas proclaims on commentary that 'this is sporting theatre at its most intense and most gripping'. Nicholas is occasionally prone to using annoyingly unnecessary hyperbole but I forgive him due to the fact he is capable of producing perfectly-pitched soundbites such as the aforementioned one. Nicholas wasn't commentating on the recently concluded 3rd Test between England and New Zealand at Auckland but, if he had been, he may well have been tempted to channel his 2005 self and repeat that phrase because it would have been just as apt as it were eight (Jesus Christ, eight!) years ago.
I actually fell asleep before the late wickets of Cook and Finn on the penultimate evening, so imagine my displeasure when I awoke to see England had finished the day four down and believe I was in the overwhelming majority in that I didn't give England a cat in hell's chance of saving the game. I was resigned to the final day being a fairly short and unsatisfying listen. In the end, it panned out anything but.

One of the reasons why sport possesses such an enduring mass appeal is its great unpredictability and ever-evolving paradigms. Contrast this with other entertainment spectacles on offer such as music, film, theatre and art. Yes, there is the same level of appreciation of talent as in sport but, with the exception of improvised material, there is not the same excitement-causing uncertainty that is present in sport. Granted, you may not know how the song, play or film ends but you can be confident someone does (although, I must confess I have been on stage many times where I have been fairly confident no-one knows how it will end!). In sport, you can never be sure of the result (insert darkly humourous reference to Pakistani match-fixing here).Never has that statement, and the old adages that come with it such as never say never and fat ladies singing, been more appropriate than when watching the final day at Auckland.

In some respects, the day played out a lot like a classic novel or an epic piece of theatre. There were twists at every turn with multiple story lines intertwining and running alongside each other, different major players taking centre stage at different times.

The first act belonged mostly to Ian Bell, who here played the role of tragic hero. Bell is one of those (numerous) England players who it seems is constantly having to prove himself to someone or other. I theorise that people get frustrated at Bell getting out simply because that means they can no longer watch him bat, rather than any detrimental effects it may have on the team's innings. Bell can make any shot in the book look like fine art. When he is in full flow he makes even the crustiest of members purr and squeal like excited teenage fangirls. I am proud, and a little smug, to say that I have never been a Bell detractor. For me, his record and technique speak for themselves. It may seem that he hasn't played many backs-to-the-wall, Collingwoodesque rearguards, but precious few batters have and, for most of his career anyway, he has played as part of a very strong England team and has consequently not had his back up against the wall too often. If he was playing 16/17 years ago when backs-to-the-wall was the modus operandi for England batters, perhaps I would judge him differently.

In Auckland however, he was a model of grit and concentration throughout his innings, much of which was played with escape still an unlikely outcome. Although he heroically defended his wicket for the entire morning session the overwhelming feeling was that he was doomed to fail, his days were numbered and his end would eventually come. All this made his display almost romantic.
Alongside Bell fought the two fresh-faced rookies of the team, Root and then Bairstow. Root has been the young darling of English cricket for months now, the heir-apparent to multiple roles within the team. One of these roles is that of the scrapper, the fighter in the mold of Atherton. He displayed why he has been anointed with these preemptive titles for nearly all the morning session with a mature and determined knock. He was broken however, when confronted with a foe to which he could not measure up, that of Trent Boult with the new ball. The slim left-armer, equipped with the new cherry, was akin to a master villan entering the piece at just the wrong time for the batters, but just the right time to thrill a captive audience. The two dropped catches in Boult's next over provided a fittingly frenetic finale to Act I, after which everyone needed a cuppa and a bite to eat to calm down. No-one could wait for the next act of this compelling drama.

Looking back at the second installment of the day's play, I must wonder whether George Lucas had a hand in the writing of the script. There was a great deal of striking back done by the resurgent Kiwi stormtroopers. The rusty and understandably hapless Bairstow fell to the potent new ball attack and for the rest of the session the England batters were under constant bombardment, surviving numerous reviews, plays and misses and the closest of close calls when the ball cannoned back onto the stumps and failed to remove a bail. The recipient of this extraordinary bit of fortune was Matt Prior. It may be his balding head and nowadays not inconsiderable beard, but Prior always reminds me of the old war veteran, the Sergeant-Major who is so admired and always followed by the troops. It is mark of how well respected he is that, even in such a seemingly hopeless situation, his arrival was a reassuring sight for both players and fans alike. Bell however, the aging and ever-wearying hero of the first session, perished in dramatic fashion that befitted his epic struggle right at the end of the act.

This terrific photo taken just after his dismissal is a perfect portrait of tragic noble defeat. The spotlight would fall on him in this pose while the orchestra would come to a devastatingly melancholy cresendo. Then the curtain would fall and there would not be a dry eye in the house. With only Broad, Anderson and Panesar to come, the audience took their teatime intermission with the gloomy belief that this piece would end the most tragic of tragedies.

The final episode of this marvellous piece of entertainment was watched and listened to by many eyes and ears that were excrutiatingly tired, people only keeping going on the pure adrenaline caused by the excitement of it all. No-one (who wasn't Kiwi anyway) was left disappointed however, as the day concluded with a crescendo that Spielberg, Wagner (the composer not the bowler) or Tolkein would have been proud of. A new character was introduced at the beginning of this act. Stuart Broad could be classed as the archetypal Byronic hero. Talented, cavalier and passionate yes, but prone to childlike petulance, brilliance only sporadically and a certain disregard for authority. He also possesses that most vital of Byronic traits, and even I can tell this, dashing good looks. England fans are notoriously polarised when it comes to virtually any player, but with Broad the stereotype is even more exaggerated. The most vitriolic of Broad critics must have been uplifted by his innings however, as it was a gloriously ungainly coming-of-age fight against himself as much as against the Kiwi bowlers.

Never has the phrase over my dead body been more apt as he came crouching across his stumps, determined to play as close to his nose as possible, his eyes never leaving the ball, save to look to his wicketkeeper for encouragement. That wicketkeeper continued on his swashbuckling way to a magnificent hundred that surely must be his best, guiding his less able partners along the way, coercing here, comforting there. He looked for all the world like a patient and experienced father assisting his children with their first drive or fishing trip. Just when we thought the ending could be called however, there came the final twist in the tail. Brendon McCullum, who in order to keep this loose tangle of analogies going, must be the chief villan of the piece and the hamstring injury added to this image. He limped around the field like an Antipodean Richard III, marshalling his troops with a great deal of cunning and a healthy dose of daring. His master stroke was to bring on that unlikeliest of assassins, Kane Williamson. Broad, although having redeemed himself in the eyes of many with his gritty and determined showing, could not see the job through. Anderson, who had himself been the hero in a similar production held in Wales four years ago, was relegated to the bit part of rabbit-in-the-headlights for this performance. Enter Monty. It is perhaps too easy to cast the distinctive and endearing left arm spinner as the fool but my word he did look foolish when he mistimed that dive!

What a beautiful thing that was. That, in amongst all this tension, two professional sports teams playing some of the most compelling cricket there could be, every player concentrating with all his might on executing his skills to the best of his ability, there could be a moment of such pure hilarity. Jonathan Agnew's incredulously joyful 'He's fallen over!' coupled with Michael Vaughan's uncontrollable cackling reaffirmed to me that not only is Test cricket the most exciting and skilful sport there is, it is also simply the nicest. Monty topped up his already overflowing cult hero status when he negotiated (played and missed) the first two balls of the final over and calmly stole a single from the third, leaving Prior to see England home and dry. Prior was no doubt overcome with relief and delight but, like any good Sergeant-Major, he kept his cool and his steely expression, offering a simple raising of both arms in celebration. Monty, in completely opposition fashion, careered down the pitch to embrace his great friend and Sussex teammate.

We the audience could all breathe freely again. Everyone who had undertook that journey on the final day, whether they were there watching live, on TV, listening on the radio or just following text updates, knew they had witnessed something special. England would have time to analyse why they had to grind out the tensest of draws against the 8th best team in the world and New Zealand would at some point seek an answer as to why they couldn't complete the kill, but these post-mortems could wait. For now the fans, and players despite what they would state in interviews, must just bask in the glory of a wonderful Test match and confirmation once again that Test cricket is the pinnacle. Only it can produce days such as this. A day of prolonged, dynamic excitement that nothing can rival. I am confident, confident enough to write it on my obsure cricket blog, that Test cricket will never die out. It always has and always will be capable of producing spectacles such as this, and we should be grateful for it.