Day 5 - August 12th - London

My last day in London for now. Tomorrow I get up early - if not quite as early as I do at home - to travel to Edinburgh.

I spend most of the day catching up with people, and keeping an eye on the cricket. I write this knowing the result as I write several days later.

I had thought the third test was the last in the series and being played at The Oval in South London, and it was annoying to find that it was being played in Birmingham with a fourth test to come. Still the Oval test is on when I am back in London next week and I hope to get a ticket to see some of it.

England has been thrashing India and as I write this have been confirmed as the world's best test team. The computer has some statisitical system which works this out depending on how many other teams you have beaten and of course you acknowledge the great achievement. It is not that long ago that England consistently had promising teams that under-achieved, playing below their best. The current team plays well above their ability, in a way that seems a bit similar to the New Zealand team of the 80s. Players like Coney, Chatfield, Wright, Bracewell and Snedden were by no means great players but they gave of their best consistently.

But of course New Zealand did have two genuine world-beaters in Richard Hadlee and Martin Crowe. At their very best, both were unstoppable. Hadlee's control of a ball was wonderful to watch. Crowe at his peak could play every shot in the book. We were lucky to have them and it hardly need be said that no New Zealand player has ever come even near to their ability. Don't tell me Fleming or Astle was anywhere near Crowe, or that Shane Bond or Chris Cairns was anywhere near as dangerous or consistent as Hadlee. New Zealand's current best player, Daniel Vettori, while admirable in so many ways, has notably failed to win many tests, even when in a position to do so.

I digress because it seems to me that the current English team lacks players who will be memorable in years to come. It lacks real stars. The opening batsman, Alastair Cook, plays with incredible concentration and determination, and any side, certainly including New Zealand, would love him in their team. But when a man plays for six hours, is in total command, against very ordinary bowling, and can score just seven fours all day, you can't help but wonder.

Graeme Swann, supposedly the best spinner in the world, is  a player I seem to have bad luck with, as he never seems to bowl all that well when I am watching. He is certainly no match for the previous generation of spinners, Warne, Murali, Kumble.

The interest in cricket here seems remarkably high despite it no longer appearing on free-to-air TV. On radio, the TMS team is still strong. Geoffrey Boycott and Vic Marks are very good summarisers and the new men Michael Vaughan and Philip Tuffnell are developing. Of the ball-by-ball men, Jonathan Agnew is outstanding both as a broadcaster and commentator and as a fair-minded analyst. It's fun listening to Agnew as he weaves in other subjects without neglecting the cricket.

Henry Blofeld is still good fun too but he seems to me to be  a bit slow in describing play these day. Key moments are decsribed firstly with the words "oh I say!" which aren't especially descriptive. He must surely retire soon. Christopher Martin-Jenkins is a masterful describer of the action but always seems a bit pompous. At one point the other day Agnew pointed out there were several people in the ground dressed as Mr Blobby and wondered about the word for a collective of Blobbies. The diversion didn't go on too long, about two minutes, and was good fun for the listener.

About 10 minutes later, Christopher Martin-Jenkins was on, and can surely not have heard Agnew's words. "There are several people in the ground in fancy dress - how ridiculous - surely the cricket is interesting enough for them!" he proclaimed. Part of describing a day's play at the cricket is describing the atmosphere - not my view but that of CMJ in his own book on cricket commentary.

The TV commentators were rather better than I found them in the past. The decision to appoint only the very best former players, rather than look for skills in broadcasting, can pay off, and can fail. Shane Warne's introduction has been a godsend I am sure - he is both a good thinker on the game and has a good sense of fun. Nasser Hussain gets better and David Lloyd is always good fun to listen to. At the other end of the spectrum, Michael Holding still has a wonderful voice, but if he has ever said anything interesting or thoughtful about the game, I've missed it. And Ian Botham - such an entertainer on the field - is death behind a mike.

If listening to TV commentary I want to hear thoughts I hadn't considered before. Each of the Sky commentators has just three stints per day - surely each could do come up with one original thought per shift. The best - Ian Chappell, Richie Benaud, Boycott, do that. Or they need to be able to communicate their enjoyment of the game - Bill Lawry, Tony Greig, Lloyd. If they are just there because of their feats 30 years ago, well...