Cricket chiefs need to use sixth sense to end frustration

With two matches to go, every possible outcome is still on the cards for the Ashes series, which in an ideal world is how it should be.

Except we've arrived at this situation by virtue of a wholly unsatisfactory conclusion to the Third Test in Birmingham.

Friends of mine went to Edgbaston for the final day in the vain hope that Australia might crumble and England would take a 2-0 lead.

They left, unfulfilled by the way proceedings dribbled to an inconclusive end and frustrated by the game's inability to modernise itself sufficiently to factor in a spare sixth day in the event of rain and bad light taking such a huge chunk out of the previous action.

For most people these days, cricket is defined by overs, whether it be 20, 40 or 50, or, in days gone by, 60.

So why, in the constant updating of the game, can't Test matches be re-defined as 500-over contests that are finished ideally within five days but in the event of 100 or more overs being lost to the elements, are then continued into a sixth?

What were the players doing on Tuesday, anyway? Watching Ice Age 3 at the local cinema? And they hardly had to cross continents for the next set-to... it was 90 minutes up the motorway.

The debate rages on about Test cricket's place in a fast-evolving sport and the need to preserve it as the pinnacle of individual achievement.

Current and past players talk of bringing in world championships and effectively an annual league table.

From a purely selfish perspective, the England and Wales Cricket Board surely don't want England's place in such a table to be compromised by a wretched English summer that leaves three or four Tests ending as draws and the national team unable to take advantage of conditions that should suit our bowlers.

More importantly, though, a credible international cricketing pecking order cannot be allowed to be influenced substantially by the whims of the elements - everything needs to be done to ensure that matches can be played to a realistic conclusion.

As more grounds get floodlights, there is less justification for fixing a finite point for the close of play purely on the basis of what the clock says.

That is not only letting down the spectators but also diminishing the sport. You can still have draws but that's as a consequence of 500 overs of batting and bowling, not rain and clouds.

There are obvious logistical issues about policing and catering, the costs of which would be more than offset by the extra revenue generated, and while manipulating television schedules in the days of terrestrial coverage might have been difficult, surely with all home Tests now being owned by Sky, that issue can be more easily negotiated.

In the end, it comes down to the will of those in charge of the game, the International Cricket Council.

The weather men say things will get better in the next few weeks but they're not exactly in a rich vein of form.

The worst-case scenario is that the next two matches are rain-affected and end in draws, so England effectively win the series by default.

With just the tiniest bit of flexibility and a few ounces of vision, it doesn't have to be like that.

Cloudy judgement by chiefs has taken sunshine out of our lives

You probably haven't uttered the words "I must rush home to watch the swimming on the TV" that often in recent years, but the world championships in Rome that ended last weekend provided some of the most riveting sporting drama of the summer, set against the backdrop of a spectacular open-air setting beneath glorious crystal-blue Italian skies.

It was an aesthetically televisual treat, great athletes surrounded by a kaleidoscope of colours to brighten a rain-sodden British summer Saturday, and the best marketing exercise the sport can ever have mounted.

So what are the world swimming authorities going to do after this most successful event? Move all future championships indoors.

Instead of bringing sunshine into our lives, you'll press the red button and the smell of chlorine will fill your living room.

Governing bodies get a lot of flak - some of it undeserved but most of it not. For precisely this reason. There's always a bigger picture and a lot of them don't (or won't) see it.

My favourite memory of Sir Bobby Robson

After a blessedly almost totally football-free summer to re-charge our enthusiasm, a genuine sense of excitement and anticipation about the coming season has been off-set by the knowledge that Sir Bobby Robson won't be around to witness it.

I played rugby with one of his sons, Andrew, for a couple of seasons in the 80s, which was a regular source of conversation when we met in later years.

Sir Bobby had a peculiar respect for rugby, although there was one rather key element of the game that bewildered him.

'A ball is, by its very nature, round,' he would say. 'Golf ball, basketball, tennis ball, football - all round. You guys are clearly not playing with a ball, so what the devil are you playing with?'

I never came up with a particularly satisfactory answer, and now the chance has gone for ever.

But I can picture him saying those words with that glint in his eye - and it makes me smile.