Cricket is a mad and contrary sport. In a Test where he masterminded a successful fourth-innings run-chase with 121 not out, Kane Williamson’s most exciting contribution was to completely bloody miss the ball and run a bye.

For those that don’t know, Williamson faced the scheduled final ball of the first Test between New Zealand and Sri Lanka with the scores level.

Eight wickets down, they couldn’t lose, but the slowly-built anxiety of defeat still being a possibility just one ball earlier hadn’t exactly dissipated.

Asitha Fernando dug it in short and Williamson attempted the kind of jaunty hopping pull shot he would never normally consider.

Even as he was in the process of completely missing the ball, non-striker The Great Neil Wagner, armed with a bulging disc in his back and a torn right hamstring, was already haring uncomfortably down the pitch to try and securing the winning bye.

Honestly, “the winning bye.” What a concept! What a sport!

What we love about this is that fundamental cricket thing of the match situation transforming ordinarily moronic decisions into correct ones.

Ball heading directly to the wicketkeeper’s gloves? Time to set off running!

The timings of everyone’s actions are great. You can see in this next shot that as Niroshan Dickwella threw, Wagner was about to dive for the ground that Williamson was still in the process of leaving.

And this is another marvellous snapshot in time. There’s a bloke on his face on the ground and a fielder visibly lamenting a missed run-out, even as another run-out attempt is at that moment taking place.

Finally, the logical conclusion to such a clear and straightforward passage of play.

Two batters (and one fielder) lie on their faces as the losing team celebrates.

It’s absolutely incredible that New Zealand manage to contrive this kind of a finish to a Test match just a fortnight after this one.

Read our features, get our email, help fund us.

Jimmy Anderson has played 179 Test matches and he was completely pissed off to lose this one by a single run. Jimmy Anderson is a quite majestically irritable cricketer.

The penultimate ball of the second Test between New Zealand and England could, and probably technically should, have been called a wide. Nobody at the Basin Reserve in Wellington really wanted the scores to move level with an extra though. Nobody except Jimmy Anderson anyway.

Next ball Anderson was out and honestly, sport’s whole meaning and impact is built on someone involving having and displaying this level of pissed-offedness.

We were struck by a particular moment just after the wicket had been confirmed when the camera focused on a frozen Anderson as the humanity surrounding him ricocheted around in glee.

The players are converging noisily. Fans are literally dancing with joy.

But someone has pressed pause on Jimmy.

The sort of whirling dervish backdrop highlighted this really well, but the contrasts continued.

Here’s Tom Blundell, who took the catch.

Here’s Jimmy.

Here’s The Great Neil Wagner, who bowled the delivery (as well as the previous one).

Even Kane Williamson slipped into not merely having, but actively displaying an emotion, which is not a thing he’s usually very big on.

And here’s Jimmy.

As Anderson repeatedly took the short steps back and forth between sadness and irritation, bedlam and buoyancy swirled around him.

Neil Wagner is most definitely experiencing emotions in this shot and he is not alone.

Even Ben Stokes was at it.

Here’s England’s captain, sauntering onto the pitch at the earliest opportunity, already in “in’t Test cricket brilliant!” mode.

But that’s not the correct way to behave. Grinning at losing a match by a single run because it was brilliant Test cricket actually chips away at the brilliance a little bit.

Sport doesn’t need everyone pulling in the same direction for the same result. It needs conflict. It needs people who want different things pulling in opposite directions. That’s what makes it magical and powerful.

Everyone knows Stokes was pulling in the opposite direction to New Zealand, but smiling immediately at a loss raises a faint shadow of ‘could he maybe have pulled slightly harder?’ Even if that isn’t true, inadvertently raising the question still diminishes things, even if just a smidge.

What you really need in the immediate aftermath of defeat is a goddamn superhero, chuntering away about how the previous delivery should have been given as a wide before descending back into melancholy.

Chuntering to the umpire? Chuntering to his batting partner? Chuntering to himself? To the void?

It doesn’t matter. All that matters is that at the age of 40, with 179 Test matches to his name, Jimmy Anderson was completely pissed off to lose this one by a single run.

Get The King Cricket Weekly Wrap, our regular email rounding-up what’s been on the site in the last seven days.

We once joked that England’s plan for Jonny Bairstow was to keep him guessing. It always seemed like the aim was to treat him as inconsistently as possible to keep him on his toes. After scoring four hundreds and a fifty in five innings last summer, it seemed safe to assume that he had made the number five spot his own. And then along came Harry Brook.

Cricketers and coaches often talk of ‘role clarity’. Only Moeen Ali can really rival Bairstow for role opacity.

Remember all those times England thought Bairstow should keep wicket? Or all those times they decided he should be freed from the wicketkeeping gloves?

Remember when he was inked in at number three? Remember when he was a very successful number six? Remember when he was a white ball specialist?

But then came the summer of 2022 and a run of form so pure and perfect that everyone immediately agreed you didn’t want to mess with this. This was Bairstow’s thing: batting at five, making incredible hundreds.

Let’s recap…

In Nottingham, against New Zealand, he made 136 off 92 balls in the fourth innings as England chased down 299 to win.

In Leeds, against the same opposition, he made 162 off 157 balls after England had been 21-4 and 55-6. He then made 71 not out off 44 balls in the second innings as England chased 296 to win.

In Birmingham, against India, he made 106 after England had been 44-3 and 83-5. Then he made 114 not out in the second innings as England chased 378 to win.

That first innings, in particular, was a herculean effort; just purely and simply one of the great Test innings, even if he hadn’t then followed it with three more hundreds and an unbeaten fifty in his next four innings.

(Speaking of Herculean, did you know that Elton John’s middle name is ‘Hercules’? What we especially love about this is that Elton was of course born Reginald Kenneth Dwight. That means that in 1972, when he embarked on changing his name, he thought to himself, “My middle name should definitely be Hercules.” And then at no point between first thinking that his middle name should be Hercules and filing the paperwork to make his middle name Hercules did he subsequently think, “Actually maybe Hercules is a bit much.” We’re pretty confident he still thinks it’s a good choice, particularly now that he’s Sir Elton Hercules John.)

Quite understandably, Bairstow couldn’t quite maintain that incredible run of form, following it up with 0, 18 and 49 against South Africa. With hindsight, failing to maintain that incredible run of form was a mistake.

Because at the time of writing, nine innings into his Test career (with one still incomplete), Bairstow’s stand-in at number five, Harry Brook, is maintaining that incredible run of form. He has made four hundreds and three fifties and is averaging over 100 with a strike-rate of 99.38. He has made heavy runs in both Pakistan and New Zealand, which are pretty different places, batting-wise. That piece we wrote last week about how he could be stopped has aged like an already-on-the-turn avocado.

When Jonny Bairstow is back to full fitness, is one or other of these men being left out of the England Test team?

No.

If Brook and Bairstow are both fit, both will be in the England Test team. That means one of them will be batting somewhere other than five. One man has batted flawlessly and only ever at number five. The other man has a lot of experience of trying to make other spots his own.

No, seriously, sign up for the King Cricket email. It’s one of those things that just makes life better.

With 15 minutes to go on day two, Stuart Broad walked out to bat at number four as England’s “Nighthawk”. Second ball he skied a hook that fell to earth after bowler and keeper left it for each other. It is hard to envisage a more Broad passage of play. Except for all the other ones.

To quickly recap the Nighthawk role, Ben Stokes described it as a nightwatchman who goes out there to slog and annoy the opposition rather than just dig in and block up an end, as is traditional.

As quite possibly the most annoying cricketer there’s ever been, Stuart Broad is a good fit for this innovative role. If you then factor in his destructive mayfly style of batting, you realise that Nighthawk is really his job and his alone.

Broad’s hook shot has long been the purest element of his batting ‘method’. Skying a hook and then watching it land between two passive fielders is therefore very Broad, very annoying and consequentially, very, very Nighthawk.

Just imagine the emotions in this moment as that pink blur travels unstoppably grasswards.

Now imagine the emotions a nanosecond later when everyone remembers that the batter who has benefited is Stuart bloody Broad.

So the moment itself certainly feels like peak Nighthawk. However, we’d argue that there remains room for improvement when it comes to the circumstances. Ask yourself whether there’s anyone in the weird wild wonderful world of Test cricket who’d be more annoyed to be involved in such a miss?

More Broad

• Let’s revisit the Netherlands’ win over England at the 2009 T20 World Cup and in particular the insanely chaotic final over from Stuart Broad
• Ranked: All eight deliveries in Stuart Broad’s world record 35-run over to Jasprit Bumrah
• Did you see… Stuart Broad’s secondary appeal?

You need more trivial emails about cricket in your inbox. We can send you some, if you want?

There was a moment during the first Test against New Zealand when England’s number five, Harry Brook, boasted a Test average and strike-rate that were both 94. Either of those would be ridiculous. Both is preposterous. Then he got out.

How did Harry Brook get out? We could have told you this in advance. He got out to one of the most consistently lethal deliveries in Test cricket: a 78mph short ball from The Great Neil Wagner.

A bottom edge into the turf bounced up juuust high enough to gently plop on top of a bail.

You’ve been Wagnered.

That was the story of the day really. As England laid into the Kiwi attack with their now customary gusto, Wagner responded the way he always responds: by bouncing the shit out of them for over after over at not much more than medium-pace.

It is truly one of the great methodologies.

Neil Wagner makes no sense.

Neil Wagner is magnificent.

Technically, you don’t *have* to get our emails…

When the weather allows New Zealand to get onto the field for the first Test against England, their attack will be without Kyle Jamieson (stress fracture) and Matt Henry (looming child). It will also be without Trent Boult because apparently no one has really decided on a selection policy for him and his situation yet. That means Scott Kuggeleijn has made the squad.

The Boult situation seemingly boils down to ‘technically available but never actually picked’ now that he’s no longer a contracted player.

Head coach Gary Stead said New Zealand would, “give priority to the locally contracted players,” before adding: “It does not mean we have ruled Trent out from anything in the future.”

So what does that amount to? He’ll only get picked once every other professional cricketer in the entire country is unavailable? Is that the position?

Unboulted

Boult has declined a national contract and New Zealand clearly want to be fair to other players. This fiercely-held commitment to common decency means they have instead picked Scott Kuggeleijn, a man who – like most cricketers – wasn’t convicted of rape in 2016 or 2017.

He wasn’t convicted in any other year either, but he did stand trial on those two occasions. There was a hung jury first time around and second time he was found not guilty.

Outlining their position on Kuggeleijn’s availability, New Zealand have previously said that, “The court is the most appropriate forum for judging matters as serious as this.”

This is true. But then the court was only concerned with determining whether Kuggeleijn had definitely raped someone. It wasn’t concerned with matters fractionally less serious than that. Many would argue that behaviour fractionally less serious than ‘definitely legally rape’ can also be a bit bad. These people may also argue that some of Kuggeleijn’s behaviour as outlined in his own words during the trial falls into the ‘a bit bad’ category.

Unkuggeleijned

A national sports team can, if it wants, choose not to pick someone, even without a rape conviction to point to as justification for the decision. If you believe that national sides are there to provide entertainment and to serve as a fun thing for the people of that country to get behind, then when a player’s behaviour impinges on those things, it makes sense to factor that in.

The All Blacks have famously operated a “no dickheads” policy and discussions about Kuggeleijn often bring suggestions that the Black Caps could do the same. While everyone has a slightly different understanding of what consitutes a dickhead, it seems safe to assume that quite a lot of people would be comfortable assigning that label in this instance.

Unrepentant

But then, you know – second chances? We’ve all learned from our mistakes, even if none of them were as bad as Kuggeleijn’s. If you go down that route, the question becomes whether or not he seems like a person ready to grasp a second chance and use it as an opportunity. Has he learned? Is he now more likely to behave in a way where not quite so many people would think he’s a dickhead? You don’t need to give someone international caps to explore these things. A lot of New Zealanders will already have formed opinions based on his behaviour and public pronouncements since 2017.

And fair’s fair. Maybe Trent Boult could also be given a second chance for his heinous decision to decline a national contract while remaining available to play for the national side. Boult bowled England out for 58 in 2018. Maybe that could be factored into selectorial decision-making? If we were a New Zealand fan pondering which of two entirely-available seam bowlers might get picked for the Test team, maybe we’d like to see the potential for that level of fun and enjoyment given a little more weight.

Subscribe to the King Cricket email. Critics are saying, “It goes out less often than you’d think. Didn’t it used to go out more often? I’m sure it used to out more often. Is he writing less these days or something?”

We previewed the Boxing Day Tests. We may as well take a look at what happened in them.

Australia v South Africa

Signs of an upturn for South Africa, who finally passed 200 for the first time in many attempts. Their second innings 204 all out was enough to secure defeat by an innings and 182 runs.

Top scorer for the Aussies was David Warner, who made his first hundred in almost three years and then made another one in the very same innings. He then squeezed in both a retired hurt and a dismissal without adding any further runs.

Speaking afterwards, Warner added to the rich tradition of batters talking up the bowling on days when they’ve made a ton by describing an Anrich Nortje spell as the fastest he’s ever faced.

To be fair to Warner, there were some stats about saying it was somewhere up there, so it wasn’t a total self-aggrandising fiction. He also said a few more specifically nice things about Nortje and the effort he always seems to put in. Even so, it’s funny how bowlers always seem to be at their most incredible when they don’t actually get the batter out. “You won’t believe how incredible that bowling that wasn’t good enough to dismiss me was,” is the message.

The third and final Test starts next week. Suffering South Africa fans might like to ponder the nature of an Ashes tour where there would still be three Tests’ worth of unravelling still to come. Three Tests may seem tough, but there’s only really time for mild fraying.

Pakistan v New Zealand

New Zealand’s first Test back in Pakistan moved rather more conventionally than England’s, even if the weight of scoring was similar.

Responding to Pakistan’s 438, the tourists made 612-9. It did however take them 163 overs to reach 500 where England reached that mark in 75.

That comparison is not to do New Zealand down in the slightest. This match was at a different ground for a start. It’s just an attempt to contextualise the rather bonkers thing that Ben Stokes’ men did a few weeks ago.

Bangladesh v India

We included this when previewing the Boxing Day Tests but it didn’t actually make it that far in the end. It was however the best match of the three, India staggering their way to a target of 145 for the loss of seven wickets.

They only got there thanks to an unbeaten 71-run partnership between Shreyas Iyer and R Ashwin.

Of course Ashwin was there. Just of course. Immune to the pressure again. As we keep saying, R Ashwin is not like other people.

A few days after the match finished, Rishabh Pant apparently fell asleep at the wheel and totalled his car which then burst into flames. He had been travelling at “a lot of speed” according to the bus driver who helped drag him out. Pant has a few injuries but thankfully seems broadly okay.

Don’t drive tired, kids. Don’t drive quickly, kids. In fact don’t drive at all kids – wait until you’re adults and then take lessons and pass your test and all that.

The King Cricket email is a handy way of finding out the site has been updated during those periods when it’s all been a bit quiet because the writer has been otherwise engaged eating too much stilton.

Kane Williamson is a weird-arsed T20 player. He’s been one of the best batters in the world for years, but quite often seems to serve less as a run-scorer and more as a comfort blanket.

Williamson made 40 off 40 balls when New Zealand failed to chase 180 against England earlier in the tournament. Today he made 46 off 42 balls in the semi-final against Pakistan.

These sorts of pedestrian contributions normally make a team and fans anxious. You watch the deliveries remaining drip away and wonder why they aren’t being better used.

But Williamson has this air of quiet wisdom about him that seems to temper that. He’s almost looked upon as some kind of par total barometer. “Williamson’s sized up this pitch,” people conclude. “140 could actually be a tough chase here.”

> Kane Williamson: Lord Megachief of Gold 2020/21

Today’s overly-cool and nurdlesome Williamson innings featured just two boundaries. The first came at the start of the 13th over when New Zealand were on 79-3 and he had 28 off 28 balls.

Entirely against type, it was a filthy slog.

Mohammad Wasim bowled something pretty wide and fairly long-hoppish. Kane caned it for six over the long boundary.

If you watch it back, it looks a typically smooth and coordinated Williamson shot. But honestly, it was a slog. The diagonal bat and the ball’s destination are the giveaways.

Firm, steady, balanced, head in the right position… but also a big bovine heave-ho.

A little while later, Mohammad Rizwan and Babar Azam did that thing they sometimes do and Pakistan won fairly easily.

T20 is a bit too complicated for us these days, so we’re instead celebrating one of cricket’s oldest and simplest pleasures via our Slog of the Day feature.

We’ve been here before. Australia are still the team that wins everything – this time gold at the Commonwealth Games.

As far as on-the-nose victory anthems go, We Are The Champions by Queen still rules the roost. Comedy writer/actor Stephen Merchant used to talk about trying to write a rival for it. The key, of course, would be to keep things sufficiently generic: “We’re the winners! We won the thing!”

Whenever there’s an Olympic or Commonwealth Games, we wonder whether bland 90s indie band Shed Seven were striving for a similar long-term royalty stream with their single Going For Gold. You don’t need us to tell you that they weren’t successful. Although we suppose we do still think about Shed Seven more than we otherwise would, so the song wasn’t an unmitigated failure. (Fun fact: Our cousin once sold a pair of either gardening or oven gloves to either the drummer or bass player from Shed Seven. (We consistently get both elements of this story wrong.) He spotted them at a house party and took a shine to them. He paid a fiver.)

As established in the opening paragraph, Australia went for and won gold at the Commonwealth Games, which was no great surprise.

India went for gold and won silver. New Zealand went for gold and then when they didn’t win that they went for bronze and won bronze. England were the unfortunate team who got to play an extra game without winning anything.

“It’s very disappointing, but I think the way we played today, we didn’t deserve to get a medal which is a bit easier to take than yesterday,” reasoned Nat Sciver – which is one way of identifying a lining that it feels cruel to describe as silver.

Get the King Cricket email. Long-term not-made-up reader Norbert Wilhelm von Gonads once told us he reckoned it had cured his pleurisy. That’s just his view, we’re not saying it did, but it’s surely worth a go if you’ve got any ailments of any description.

Jonny Bairstow has worked out that he can score twice as many runs simply by doubling his strike-rate. Daryl Mitchell has realised he’ll probably keep hold of his Test place if he scores a hundred in every single match. But what do these developments actually prove?

Because yeah, sure, Jonny Bairstow’s in form right now. But will he still be in form next week? Will he still be in form next year? Will he still be in form in 10 or 20 or 50 years’ time?

The same goes for Daryl Mitchell. It’s all well and good scoring 538 runs in a three-match series, but what good will that do him in Pakistan in November? What good will it do him when New Zealand are touring England in 2032 or 2042 or 2072?

And okay, they’ve each shown they can make runs in these conditions against these bowling attacks. But can they make runs in India or Australia, against those teams’ bowlers? Could the two of them make hundreds against Jeff Thomson in his pomp, bowling from 18 yards on a disgraceful club pitch that’s unfit for cricket? And would they be so dominant batting in a pyroclastic flow against a bowling machine set to 200mph?

To truly prove yourself as a batter, you have to make runs against everyone, everywhere, in all formats and all match situations. Anything less than that and someone, somewhere is going to be left unimpressed.

Can Mitchell and Bairstow make runs one-handed? Can they make runs with their eyes closed? Can they make runs without using a bat?

These are sterner tests. Daryl Mitchell and Jonny Bairstow haven’t proven themselves yet.

Follow us on Twitter if you like seeing links to King Cricket articles and honestly not a lot else because social media is unhealthy and you should probably try and avoid it.