What an utterly appalling Test in terms of some of the standards of play. I know pundits quite often predict a high scoring match on a flat wicket and the highest score is about 300, but some of the shots were awful. And don't the batsmen EVER play the situation? You're X wickets down with not many on the board, play for your wicket. You're going well and only 150 behind, don't throw it away. Not only did England manage to end up 4/3 and 30/4, but then Anderson throws down seven overs of nothing for 54 runs at near eight an over. Then the kiwis themselves throw wickets away and lose nine for 65.
A lot rests on Strauss who is one of several coming in for stick, bar Collingwood NONE of the top order have performed consistently and he may have started the 2nd innings with the lowest average in the series of them all, but he is batting out of his accustomed opening role.
And Vaughan averages a meagre 30 as captain against the top seven Test sides, his overall average of 37 as captain aided by averaging 54 against West Indies and Bangladesh - he's played 15 as captain against those two sides, this is his 30th Test against the top seven sides. His six runs in this Test are hardly a fine example of leading by example, not getting off to a start doesn't help. That 4/3 start reminded me of a certain Test in South Africa, were we not 2/4 in that one?