Had England's fielding been better the Test would have been over by now, no doubt about it. They missed five catches, a run out and a rather straightforward stumping in, as you said, a pretty sloppy display.

What idiot said 'catches win matches' it has been the opposite way around in this series. Two of the catches were easy Paul Collingwood's off Ian Bell at second slip and Kevin Pietersen's at mid off. The other three, to Tim Ambrose standing up, Alastair Cook diving to his left and Ian Bell diving forward were hard but England laid down a marker in the first Test and have failed to live up to it here. It highlights why they are such a frustrating side to watch.

But the groundfielding was poor too - more fours going through the legs of fielders.

Even so have played pretty well. Broad was excellent today, he really looked the part.

It is exciting. I was quite exciting at the end of last summer against India in the way England's attck worked. Then it contained Anderson, Tremlett and Sidebottom.

We have been saying that there was something wrong with the England Test side but it seems a fresher more vibrant team, even though the fielding has been poor. Is it because they are winning, or is it the excitement that fresher, more eager, younger faces bring allowing them to win. I'm not sure but, as you said, it feels better.

Hopefully these three will remain fit, gain the confidence and experience they need and take lots of wickets. Suddenly we are talking about what players might do in the future rather than worrying whether they ever be as good as they once were. It is a big change of attitude for everyone.

That's putting me on the spot. Sidebottom has done better than many of us ever imagined. He is 30 and could possibly play for another three or four years. That equates, fitness permitting, to another 30-35 Tests @ 3-4 wickets a Test. Sidebottom could be 150 plus wicket-taker at an average of say 28-30 - pretty good.

Anderson is still only 25 so who knows how much Test cricket he could play. He currently has 68 wickets so he could easily become a 200 wicket plus bowler. But his average, currently in the high 30's needs to come down.

Broad is 21 so he could be around for a decade. Again he could easily be a 200 plus wicket-taker. But like all these things there is injury and form to worry about. But if they all fulfil their potential, and the likes of Tremlett etc continue to push England will have a good seam attack for some time to come.

Monty should only get better too. I suppose the only thing they need is an all-rounder but thye are hard to come by.

It was not good enough and the ironic cheers have started again. Panesar had got rid of them last year but, no doubt, they will be back again this summer. All you can do is continually work hard with him and hope he improves. England have not got any serious spinners that will replace him.

Flintoff's return will be interesting because England would be worse off with a Flintoff who can do a job but not one as well as he once did. If he replaced a batsman the batting would be weaker and the same with the bowling. Flintoff has to return capable of doing what he once did if England are going to benefit from his presence.

We have not seen him yet, but the performance and the result here has probably made his conversations with Peter Moores and Michael Vaughan a little easier. Giles Clarke has been knocking around to. We will speak to him when he returns from Dubai.

He is a beauty. Now he is suggesting that English cricket tries to copy the IPL, four England qualified players, four under 23's and three overseas players. Then we expand the Twenty20. Talk about killing the goose. He must think players can play every day of the year without getting tired or injured. he may have a good business brain but he does not seem to understand cricket.

Sorry, but this gets my goat. Don't the ECB and assorted other people know why the phrase 'Keep 'em wanting more' was invented?

Talking of money, the players seem sensible in this regard. There doesn't seem much loose talk about going to make a quick buck in the Indian leagues and their loyalty, expected as it should be, is important.

Yes, the ICC bigwigs have an important meeting in Dubai this week when scheduling among other things is talked about. Doubtless, it's a subject to which we shall return.

The saddest thing about Clarke is that he so obviously believes that only he, at long last, understands how to make English cricket viable! This, coupled with a very undemocratic, non-grassroots structure for the game, is likely to lead to an elite who want to make money, and who don't understand that many of cricket's more lasting fans are the one who cherish Test cricket, love the drawn-out, glorious struggle for supremacy, and who feel that some Twenty20 may be fun, but it simply isn't as good qualitatively as the five day epic. Part of the joy of Test cricket was, and should be, its relative rarity. If there were basically 7-8 Tests in a year, generally the players would be fit, you would have a treat in store, and there would not be the growing sense of "Oh, the treadmill grinds forward another inch towards higher productivity for the master plan".

I grew up listening to Test Match Special, and there was nothing like the thrill of waking up early, before school, and hearing the much-loved voices describing how things were in India, Australia, remote parts of the world. Much of that was the sense of rarity, that each Test was something to treasure. You can't get that when it feels as if there is a Test every week, that Twenty20 occupies most free days, and there are so many one day internationals that you feel Dante missed something in his Inferno. I can see those guilty of simony being chained in burning seats and compelled to watch a meaningless butchery of a great game - for all eternity! Doubtless, to make matters worse, they will have to listen to Australian commentators. Perhaps Mr Clarke should be warned of the fate that awaits him? As for the idea of imitating the BCCI - God help us! Even the Indian press seem thoroughly unimpressed by their greed, nepotism and arrogance!

If Clarke wants to do something to benefit the English game, I would suggest that he starts by resolving the preposterous situation whereby people living abroad can get Test Match Special on the internet for home games, but not, mysteriously, when England tour. This is simply beyond bizarre. Surely it can't be that expensive to get the rights? TMS has been cherished by the more serious England fans for decades, and is loved around the world. That's the sort of thing that matters, not a string of irrelevant games that exhibit the trivialities of cricket. Play some Twenty20 if you must, as a taster for the groundlings, but in God's name, don't lose the things that matter more.

Returning to matters in hand, England should win this, but until Oram fell, I was starting to wonder if England had dropped too many chances. Yes, it was windy, but then, you get windy days in England too, and players ought to be a little better prepared. Is it me, or is Pietersen not quite the fielder he should be? Thank God for Broad and Sidebottom, who did an excellent job. Funny, that for so long we did not hear of Sidebottom - and yet we shall miss him terribly when he goes. O Duncan, you do have some things to answer for!

Keith, I think you were addressing nickzi, not yatish *s*. Cheer up! There are still some great games out there - and I think the sport that gave us Ashes 2005 still has a lot to give. Yes, the money men are scum, but thankfully they don't get to play. I think the best way for us to revive cricket is to go the grassroots way, build it up from below, and then boot the corrupt money-wallahs out.

Mike, when you say that building from the grassroots up is the way to go to revive English cricket, do you think Mike Gatting in his "supremo" role overseeing all age groups of cricket in this country is a) the right man for the job; (I know Nasser wanted Mark Ramprakash) and b) Does he have the "power" to inflict the changes needed?

I know Mike has spoken about a "vision" of their being a greater link between club cricket and first class counties - like the grade system in Australia.