The Surfer

"I watched my father play every week, and I know I wouldn't have achieved what I have otherwise," she explains. "We're very lucky now, though, that girls don't have to rely on their background to get into cricket. The opportunities, whether in terms of one-or-one coaching or the ability to compete in all-girl cricket in schools, are so much greater." A family visit to England's victory over India during the 1993 World Cup would decree her fate. "We all ran on to the pitch afterwards," she remembers. "I knew in that moment that I wanted to play cricket for a living."

Edwards, retained as captain of the four-day team, as he was in the home series against Sri Lanka 'A' in June, is clearly at ease in that part of the world - and against India. He claimed the No.3 position with Test hundreds against the Indians in Dominica two years ago and more runs in the back-to-back series in Bangladesh and India. The altogether different environment in England exposed flaws in his technique (he was not the only one); a couple of hundreds in the Caribbean last season, one, 190 against Sri Lanka 'A', went some way to restoring his reputation. His retention at the helm is a hint that the selectors are considering him as a future Test captain. [Kieran] Powell, now with a more settled Test place and, at 23, five years Edwards' junior, seems the likelier option

The importance of the peripherals is being exaggerated. Flower has created a winning culture, and it is not anywhere near as blinkered and unfeeling as some suggest. How about we enjoy what is still a golden era for English cricket?

It is hardly an honourable or admirable tradition, but does it deserve the chorus of tut-tutting that has greeted the incident at the Oval? As a diehard cricket fan, I care passionately how England players conduct themselves on the pitch. When they let themselves down, as they have done repeatedly this summer with cynical time-wasting, I am the first to scream abuse at the television. But I cannot work myself up into a lather of indignation about what they get up to when stumps are drawn. Boys, ultimately, will be boys.

A crowd by definition has its own mind, not necessarily in sync with any one member and more extreme than any of them. It is improbable that any would boo Clarke, Watson or O'Brien to their faces.Crowds never have been obliged to be nuanced and fair, of course. Many in history have been moved beyond even drunken verbal excess to terrible violence. AFL and cricket have in common that they have largely been spared this. Often, crowds in these sports are one-sided and intimidating, even blood-curdling. David Lloyd, former England batsman and coach, now ever charming pundit, once laughed off a call for a gentler polity in the stands in England during an Ashes series. ''I remember '74-'75, Lillee and Thomson,'' he said. ''No milk of human kindness then; it were 'kill, kill, kill'.''

To some degree, Australia's best allies in this series were the English. If there was one team out there that had a 100 per cent, rock-solid belief that Australia could win Test matches, it was England. This began with the preparation of pitches. So scared were the English of Australia's fast bowlers, they ordered wickets that neutralised the strength in pace on both sides, and to some degree did England's batsmen as much harm as Australia's. Dry, slow, Indian-style wickets made it hard work for seamers and batsmen alike, all so that England could exploit their advantage in spin and occasionally reverse swing

The point is that Test cricket cannot afford to be this precious. The simplest, most sensible, solution would be to set a consistent standard which is more lenient than the one that currently applies. The light should not just be bad. It should be awful. No wonder the ICC has not been able to organise a single day-night Test despite MCC's World Cricket Committee calling for them. Right now it cannot even keep a game going under lights on an overcast afternoon. Test cricket is said to be on its knees. Which is unsurprising, given that it keeps shooting itself in the foot.

And so cricket found itself again at a crossroads between entertainment and something (literally) darker, between an audience-chasing spectacle and a proxy clash of civilisations. And not for the first time, it was resolved, as a draw, by officials bound by the pettifogging precedents they themselves had set. Something like the European Commission without the shooting.

Stealthily, in disguise as a television commentator, Warne has crept into a position of influence over the Australian Test team. Recall the recommendations of the February Warnifesto. Mickey Arthur to go as coach and Darren Lehmann brought onto the staff. Check. Rod Marsh to head selections. Check. Ed Cowan out. Check. James Faulkner in. Check. Nathan Lyon receives backing as spinner. Check, eventually. Granted, the Warnifesto didn't foresee the return of Brad Haddin and Chris Rogers, but through his influence with Lehmann and Michael Clarke, Warne has exerted a sway on tactics, selections, batting order, and other subtle changes.

The selectors might have got it right, eventually. They did not choose Smith in the Ashes squad, or indeed for the Champions Trophy. He was sent around Scotland and Ireland with Australia A, and one of Mickey Arthur's last acts as a selector was to discuss drafting Smith into the Ashes tour. Of the youngsters in the Australian squad, he is the only one to have survived the selectors' flights of imagination and played in every Test match. His success at the Oval is a reward for that rare element in recent selections: faith.

He was soon signed up for the IPL, whether for the Kochi Tuskers, the Pune Warriors or the Royal Challengers Bangalore. There was every chance that Smith might have gone the same way as a Kieron Pollard or a Dirk Nannes, T20 troubadours for whom Test cricket was a long-lost dream, albeit rather a laborious one.