Stage set for Ashes thrills and spills

48 days, 22 players, 5 tests, 2 nations and one 11cm tall urn. The Ashes begins tomorrow as England and Australia battle it out to try to win the tiny trophy that is surely the hardest in the whole of sport to hold aloft in celebration. Still, it's an endearing quirk of this most enduring of sporting rivalries.

It's official now. The #Ashes is ON! #CmonAussie pic.twitter.com/dBLsCIGiJ2

— cricket.com.au (@CricketAus) July 7, 2015

The Ashes may have been played a little too often in recent years due to a schedule that is harder to decipher than the Duckworth Lewis method, but that hasn't dampened the spirits ahead of this clash. In fact, a combination of a big change in personnel for England and a stunning test and one-day series with Australia's Antipodean neighbours, means this series feels surprisingly fresh.

2 captains, 1 Investec #Ashes Trophy & 1 little urn... It all starts tomorrow!! pic.twitter.com/wVgI09hZKa

— England Cricket (@englandcricket) July 7, 2015

In many respects the tables have turned completely from 2013. Then England were the older and more settled side, buoyed by a series victory in Australia and a widely feared bowling lineup. Australia were regrouping under a new coach and were attempting to integrate newer players who had plied their trade in the more aggressive confines of the shorter form of the game.

Now, fast forward two years and England go into this series led by a new coach - an Aussie no less to add yet another subplot - and are trying to harness a new spirit from players with one-day experience. Australia's pace attack has established a fearful reputation and that, coupled with buckets of experience in the batting ranks, makes them clear favourites. It probably says a lot about the respective nations that Aussies have been queuing up to make bold predictions of a whitewash while Ian Bell, a veteran of six series, is happy to accept the role of underdog for the home team (which, it's worth noting, hasn't lost an Ashes in England since 2001).

Despite the fact that the Baggy Greens have the world's number one batsman in their ranks in Steve Smith, you do feel that the series rests on the way England's batsmen cope with the Australian attack.

The visitors arrive from Down Under with the most fearful pair of Mitchells since Grant and Phil from Eastenders in the shape of bowling duo Starc and Johnson. Johnson blew the batsmen away with sheer pace on his home soil in 2013/14 and will be hoping that his sheer reputation sends ripples of fear through the home dressing room. Even more worrying for England is the fact that Starc is possibly even better.

The aggression of Ben Stokes and Jos Buttler could meet their fire with a counter-attacking fire, but England will need to accept that there will be failures in taking such an approach. All concerned must hold their nerve and back such players to come good. The players themselves need to find the right tone, remembering that they are in a test and not a T20.

Before these champing-at-the-bit youngsters arrive at the crease though it's up to Captain Cook to steer his side through the early exchanges. He has shown promising signs so far in 2015 of a return to form and it's hard to imagine an England win without a significant contribution from the nation's record test run scorer.

While Cook needs to draw on all of his powers of concentration to set the tone with the bat, his fellow record breaker Jimmy Anderson will need to shine with the ball. Much is made of the 'English conditions' being tough to cope with. Anderson - in tandem with Stuart Broad - is vital to making this home advantage pay.

In a way that's the key to success for England. The old timers - Cook, Bell, Anderson and Broad - must set a solid platform from which the younger players can shine. Cook needs to let that message filter into his captaincy too. He's often accused of being poor tactically but essentially he doesn't need a grand plan - he just need to be a calm head to get the best from Stokes, Wood, Buttler and Lyth.

In Joe Root England have a player with the class to aspire to Steve Smith's batting crown - and the potential to be star man. He will be targeted like never before and - thanks to David Warner - already has a bit of spice on his Ashes menu.

1/2 Disappointing to have my character questioned- those who know me realise how ridiculous Warner's excuse for hitting me sounds...

— Joe Root (@joeroot05) July 4, 2015

2/2 ...but that's his choice to try and justify his actions. I'm just extremely excited about next week and getting back out there.

— Joe Root (@joeroot05) July 4, 2015

In Gary Ballance and Moeen Ali, England do have two question marks. Both, however, have earned the chance to prove their critics wrong. Last summer's performances from this pair were superb, Ballance with a formidable batting average and Moeen taking wickets applenty against the supposed spin specialists of India.

It's certainly set for an intriguing contest. Confident, experienced and formidable favourites against a talented, developing side with home advantage. Australia probably should shade it but the signs are there that it could be a good contest.

It's also one of those all-too-rare occasions where test match cricket takes centre stage and a series is played out over five matches. Here's hoping for a cricketing feast that's even tastier than the Kiwi clashes that have whetted the appetite so nicely.

Beware a policy dressed up as 'common sense'

We're being spoiled aren't we? Not content with the actual budget just a few weeks ago (it probably seems like longer) - George Osborne is giving his red box another outing for an emergency budget. The emergency being that he's not had chance to have his own way in the coalition, presumably.

All that means a political budget to set out the political agenda for the coming five years - with moves to come good on manifesto promises and to start to admit to where the cuts will come.

Yet amid the pre-budget excitement (if you can call it that) and the Labour leadership excitement (no, probably not) I couldn't help by getting frustrated at the fact that so many so many complex issues are reduced to overly simplistic debates under the cloak of common sense.

Take some examples of issues under debate at the moment.

On last week's BBC Question Time, health secretary Jeremy Hunt appeared open to the prospect of charging patients who miss their appointments. Fair enough, you might think. After all, these missed appointments waste valuable time that could be given to other patients.

Yet, when you think about it, it's not so simple. Which is probably why Hunt had the rug pulled from under him by 'Government sources' in the days to follow.

The problem is that, in order to charge people who missed appointments, you'd need to set up a bureaucratic system to administer the fines. You'd have to handle appeals and chase payments. You'd also have to acknowledge that some people miss appointments for very good reasons - public transport/traffic issues or ill health, for example.

Plus, I dislike the idea of putting a financial transaction at the heart of the health service. The issue here is that when, for example, the hospital writes to you to inform you that it needs to move your appointment at short notice - by which time you've already arranged cover at work, say - how long before the patient seeks financial recourse for their own inconvenience?

Just as with student tuition fees - making the debate about price transforms the patient/doctor relationship into one that, like student/tutor, becomes rooted in money and what you should expect from that money. While no-one appears to be suggesting charging for appointments yet, the value for an appointment would be clear from the level of the fines set out.

So an unwieldy system of fines that would cost money to administer, would likely 'catch out' people with legitimate excuses and would put a financial relationship into the heart of something that shouldn't be about money. Not such common sense now.

Far harder, but also more palatable, is a longer-term drive to make missing appointments socially unacceptable. Still, you worry that long term and hard work aren't as attractive.

That hits at the main problem about framing policy as a 'common sense idea'. It's a ploy to make sure that the opposition can't oppose you despite the fact that, beyond the rhetoric, your idea might not be all it's cracked up to be.

Take another example. English votes for English laws (the horribly named EVEL) is another catchy soundbite that sounds like good common sense politics. Why should the Scots have a say on English laws?

Yet, here we go again. How does this work in practice? If a backbencher proposes spending big money on quickening the pace of the establishment of academy schools, for example, that might have a cost implication on the budget as a whole and, as a result on the resources for Scotland. So, where do we draw the line on what constitutes an English-only issue? Having spent so much time and energy keeping the Scots in the union, might we be in danger of showing them the exit again?

And why stop there? Should MPs for cities in the north west of England have a say in what happens to me in Lincolnshire? Does our MP have a right to have a say on HS2, which comes nowhere near me?

It all sounds like something that is a thinly veiled excuse for one side or the other to use to reform the voting system in the favour. Especially since history from the last 15 years shows that this 'problem' has affected...well pretty much nothing. Barely any votes on laws since 2001 would have changed if Scottish MPs were taken out of the equation. Albeit, granted, that has been with a slightly less feisty bunch of MPs from north of the border but it shows that Scottish representatives have not, up until now, skewed the course of events.

Far better to solve the issue of 'nodding dog' MPs who blindly follow the party line regardless of what their constituents think. But, as with GPs, this is probably harder to achieve.

On a similar note, you often hear people talk of the need to 'means test' benefits to pensioners, namely things such as the free television licence, winter fuel payments, bus pass etc. Why, the argument goes, does a millionaire pensioner need any of the above?

That again, sounds sensible. However, as with the GP example it requires red tape to administer and, importantly like 'EVEL' it creates a wider problem.

The whole system of taxation in this country works by everyone paying in, regardless of what they 'take out' in services used. Small symbolic gestures such as these show that everyone gets something out of their relationship with the state.

If we start to question someone's worthiness of getting 'something back' then we open up the question of whether that person feels the need to chip in in the first place. We also begin to question, as a society, our wider relationship with the state. Why must I, as a non-smoker, contribute to services that assist those wishing to quit smoking? Why do my taxes need to go to pay for infrastructure projects in parts of the country that I do not visit?

The principle that everyone pays in and everyone gets something back for their contribution should not be undermined so easily.


It is, of course, easy to be cynical about politics and politicians. But the point remains that saying something that sounds like 'common sense' is not the same as carrying out a well thought-out plan. Poor legislation can be enacted for the right reasons. But it pays to be wary of anyone who offers a simple, black and white answer to any issue - be it a Labour leadership contender, a Tory celebrating their first proper budget or one of those lesser-spotted Lib Dems.

Lessons from cricket for English football after under-21s exit

When it comes to football, what do Spain, Holland and France all have in common? Better than England a battle hardened follower of the Three Lions might say...

Yet, actually, none of these international powerhouses even made it to the under-21 European football championships. It's a little unfair that England's young stars have been widely criticised for 'flopping' at a tournament that that trio weren't good enough to make.

Today Germany crashed out with a 5-0 defeat against a Portugal side that beat England 1-0. Presumably the same mob that came out with the tired old cliches about England's side will be hammering the heirs to the world champions' shirts now too?

The worst thing about the England national team is not the quality of the football, it's the ridiculousness of the reactions to it. Win a couple of games and we're tournament winners in waiting. Lose one and everyone should be sacked, the Premier League must be reformed and the players are roundly pilloried.

When it comes to the under-21s the reaction is even more tiresome. Yes, we need to get more of our young talent into Premier League starting XIs and yes we should pick our best available players in the age category.

But these tiresome circular debates do little good for the players who are actually there. Spending time moaning about the lack of Jack Wilshere or Ross Barkley will do little to instil confidence in their replacements.

Likewise there is little recognition that only 8 teams can make this tournament. Losing in the group stages of the under 21 Euros is hardly comparable to the adult sides. Our track record of reaching these events is excellent and no-one has an entitlement to win.

I also feel we've lost track of what the point of the under-21s is. Yes tournaments, results and competitions are important - but the ultimate goal is to groom the next generation. The only way to judge how much of a 'flop' or not Southgate's side is is to look back on this lineup and see how many make it as full internationals.

Southgate himself has gone from England senior manager in waiting to under fire, a trajectory that befell his predecessor. The side themselves are now being labelled 'mediocre' on the radio by the likes of Danny Mills and Joey Barton - rent-a-quote players who will know a thing or three about mediocrity.

In saying this I do think there is a need to address the 'stage fright' our youngsters encounter on such occasions (nothwithstanding selection and injuries). Yet the reaction to this tournament is part of the problem.

I can't help thinking that some lessons could be learned from England's one day cricket team. Battered and bruised from a pathetic World Cup showing (and you thought the u21s performance was bad) the team has turned its fortunes around by letting its young talent loose.

The biggest and most refreshing change in 50-over cricket for England has been to remove the fear of failure. Players are sent out to attack, express themselves and be aggressive.

It's tempting to say that this is how the footballing young guns should play. It's certainly too simplistic to say 'all out attack' is the way forward - but the aggression and freedom to express themselves is key.

Yet, when it comes to the cricketing revolution this summer, patience has also been key to the success. Fans and media have embraced the new regime and accepted that defeats and set backs are inevitable when a team sets out to play a riskier but more exciting way.

Are we ready to accept that our young up and coming footballers will make mistakes and lose games? Until we are the straightjacket will be on and the fear of failure will inhibit the way our young stars go about their business.

I can't help thinking that that mentality - over and above team selection, formations and managers etc, - is important to encourage and nurture our under-21s. If we're to do that - and match England's exciting cricketing turnaround on the cricket field - the long-term benefit for the senior level could be telling.

That means that, as the public, we too must play our part and stop simply trotting out criticism from the sidelines. This negativity is part of the problem.

Exciting start for England's 'new era'

England's cricketers have been playing a different version of the one day game to the rest of the world for many years - a slower, duller and less successful one at that. Today it would be an understatement to say the penny finally seemed to have dropped.

At a humbling World Cup the side continued to go through the motions while exciting attacking line ups fielded by rival side put them well and truly to shame. We were happy to 'get 250 on the board' while most teams wanted to have reached that total with 10 or more overs left. Our batting was timid and our all round game hampered by poor plans based on out-of-date statistics.

The talk after the tournament - where we've had a welcome switch to red ball cricket - was of the need for a 'new era'. Long-term followers will have listened that and thought 'we've heard that one before'. It's easy to talk of change - no-one in sport ever talks of carrying on losing - but it's harder to match those words with actions.

The signs were promising as soon as the squad was selected - and there was a real will to see the likes of Hales, Roy and Rashid let loose at last alongside a smattering of other fresh names. The expectation was that this bunch could give the beaten World Cup finallists of New Zealand a decent game - and learn from them in the process.

It wouldn't be England if everything went smoothly and the loss of Jason Roy from the first ball brought the optimists crashing down to earth straight away.

But not to worry. The excellent Joe Root - sure to be England's star performer in all formats for years to come - swiftly went about keeping the faith of the watching public. With sumptuous stroke play and powerful hitting he rebuilt the innings with the help of captain Eoin Morgan.

Root is so good that he often gets touted as a possible captain but I'm more than happy that he continues without that particular crown of thorns for the time being. Morgan's knock - and later captaincy in the field - proved his worth at the helm. You always felt the Irishman would've been happier with a freer, more instinctive game plan anyway and so it proved.

But then came the setbacks. Wickets fell and at 202-6 the timid old England of the World Cup would've folded. Not so today. The brilliant Buttler and fearless Rashid simply took up the charge and powered Morgan's men on and on. Buttler's brute force, timing and invention was breathtaking and Rashid's bucaneering knock shouldn't be understimated either, helping to drive his partner on.

The icing on the cake came in some style courtesy of Liam Plunkett, who came in and smashed his first two balls for six apiece and saw the innings over the 400 mark.

The records tumbled - but the symbolism was even more important. We can mix it with the big boys after all.

New Zealand approached their impossible chase with admirable bravery. McCullum briefly threatened to inflict pain on Steven Finn but, buoyed by the aggression of the batsmen, the tall fast bowler shrugged off a couple of hefty blows, held his nerve and sent the Kiwis' talisman packing to begin a haul of 4-35.

The highlight of the bowling innings, though, came from Adil Rashid. The Yorkshire leg spinner has been talked about for so long and justified the faith to at last give him a go. He went through his full repertoire of deliveries and helped to tame the middle order with a fantastic 4-55. There's a real joy in watching a leg spinner in full flow and it was a delight to see this lesser-spotted art performed in and England shirt to such effect.

And, with that, England polished off New Zealand for 198, winning by a massive 212 run margin. At the World Cup 212 alone looked a struggle.

The important thing is not to get carried away. There will be days when batsman fail - indeed Roy and Billings didn't shine this time - and others when Rashid receives some 'treatment'. The magnificent manner of the victory in this match and the goodwill it will rightly earn deserves to secure patience from selectors and supporters. We won't get 400 every time but we have shown that aggression and positivity can pay off. Trevor Bayliss can simply burn a few copies of this performance and reach for his pipe and slippers for now. More of the same please...

Richard III is Leicester's crowning glory

Having lived in Leicester for several months while studying to be a journalist - and having returned several times since to see friends or for shopping - one thing jumped out as different when heading there last weekend.

Before I'd even reached the city, the 'Richard III' effect was clear from the road signs - now updated to guide those on a royal pilgrimage.

And, as strong as the pull of a nostalgic trip to Firebug or other old drinking haunts was, it was an appointment withe the king that took me back to Leicester last Saturday.

The road signs aren't the end. Throughout the city proud flags and signs - and shops 'cashing in' of course - have popped up, embracing the 'car park king' as their own.

And why shouldn't they? As a history graduate I was shocked and fascinated in equal measure by the discovery of the remains of the last Plantagenet monarch. The journalist in me was equally enticed by the sheer absurdity of the fact he was buried under a council car park. It's a wonderful story and a visit to the city was long overdue.

The visitor centre is located opposite the Cathedral - home, after much debate, to Richard's remains - and sits on the site of the discovery itself.

The centre - an old school building partly on the site of the old Grey Friars Church - houses an exhibition on two floors. The ground floor tells the tale of Richard's life. The path Richard took from birth to throne to Bosworth battle field is complex and it would be easy to bamboozle a visitor with the twists and turns of this story. The centre skilfully avoids that - combining an OK introductory video replete with actors explaining the timeline with a walkthrough of his short reign as King of England.

The video does a fair job but the displays are much better. Short, snappy, text keeps this engaging - introducing the 'Princes in the Tower' debate alongside the lesser known aspects of Richard's reign. It's hard to consider just how great a reformer Richard may have been from such a short tenure - but the legislation introduced here shows that the period is worth closer scrutiny for someone, like me, for whom this is not their specialist period.

Princes, legislation and death in battle all makes for a pretty full menu downstairs. Some people may feel they'd have liked to see more meat on such fleshy topics but that's what the books in the shop are for. I think it was all handled pretty well considering this is not the sole focus of the centre.

That's apparent upstairs, where the story of the discovery of Richard's remains is told. Quite whether we need to see the exact hi-vis council vest, dig permit paperwork, boots and digger head used on the fateful day is a matter for debate but you can forgive a bit of over-excitement given the magnitude of the project and you certainly can't argue all bases aren't covered.

The story of the dig is illuminated nicely with video clips and cuttings - and is followed by handy interactive displays on the methods used to verify that the remains were, in fact, Richard's. Alongside this scientific and factual part of the display was a particularly enjoyable section on the depictions of Richard in fiction throughout history - and how some historians have challenged this over time.

Whether you're a fully paid up Ricardian or not, the passionate people behind the project to unearth the king have earned their right to open up the debate on this most fascinating figure from our history.

After the exhibition there's a chance to walk across a glass floor over the exact spot in which the now-famous find occurred. It shows how tantalisingly close to the surface he was lying all along.

It's well worth then making the short trip across the road to the Cathedral - where the king is finally buried in a more befitting manner.

At £7.95 some may argue the exhibition was a tad on the expensive side. It's cheaper than the visiting exhibitions that are held in the British Museum, for example, though and - while it probably takes less time to digest - was a very different type of attraction.

It's not so much about exhibits and artefacts and bringing history to life through objects. Instead it's about an encapsulating story and one that shows that the events of the past are never a closed book. 1485 may be a long time ago but here we are, in 2015, still debating the mystery of 'the Princes' and the merits of the last English king to die in battle.

The centre has certainly inspired me to want to read on. It's also encouraging to see Leicester embrace this history and celebrate the past with such enthusiasm. My home city of Nottingham could probably learn a thing or to about how a prosperous and vibrant present/future can be helped with a rich past.

I'll have to return to those pubs next time...

Peter Kay's Car Share was a comedy gem

Peter Kay certainly returned to the nation's screens in style with Car Share, a hugely enjoyable six-part show which was easily the best new comedy I'd enjoyed since The Thick Of It.

The northern funnyman's latest vehicle (!) was a co-creation with Paul Coleman, who he had worked with on Max and Paddy's Road to Nowhere and Britain's Got the Pop Factor.

I've always been a fan of Kay's work. Phoenix Nights was a wonderful sitcom and anyone who has had the 'pleasure' of a brush with clubland in their life will know it's superbly well observed. His stand up, too, was genuinely funny if sadly over-quoted and imitated by people who were a lot less funny.

Still, if being working class or northern (to at least some degree) helped you laugh hardest at his previous work, Car Share - thanks to Coleman - hit at a neat idea with an even wider appeal.

Kay's John Coleman and Sian Gibson's Kayleigh Kitson (also credited as a co-writer along with Tim Reid) were thrust together in a company car share scheme and we get to enjoy their journeys to and from work. Both characters are richly fleshed out in a way that makes them effortlessly easy to relate to.

Either alone or with a friend or partner, we've all enjoyed the unique laughs and frustrations to be had when sharing a vehicle. The genius of this show was to make the radio the 'third person' in the car as we see the pair guess the 'golden hour', sing along to the sort of songs that are spot on for the type of commercial station invented by the writers and 'talk back' at the adverts. Only Alan Partridge has used the radio to such comic effect.

Kay getting 'caught' belting out 'You're The Voice', the banality of management-speak and the modern amusement of the 'Bluetooth phone call' were just three of the many 'we've all been there' moments to savour. There were also set piece moments such as Gibson's 'dogging' misunderstanding that were choke-on-your-cup-of-tea funny.

Added into the mix is just the right amount of 'will they, won't they' romance for the two main characters - something that was never resolved in a way that satisfyingly left us all wanting more.

Subtly good acting, astute observations and fantastic gags made this a superb success and, if the ratings were anything to go by, the BBC would be barmy not to go back begging for more. Such rare comedy gems should be treasured

A welcome return to Trent Bridge

You can't beat a spot of cricket at Trent Bridge, and the purest way to get a fix is with a day of county championship cricket. Yes, there's not the pyrotechnics of the Twenty20 or the intensity of a Test Match - both enjoyable in their own right - but there's a real joy to be had from days such as today.

It's perhaps easy to take the venue for granted but we shouldn't. This ever-evolving ground - with all singing and dancing scoreboard screens and new stands - is a world class setting and regularly ranked among the top of its kind by people within the game. It pays not to forget how lucky we are to have that in reach.

A county championship match offers the perfect chance to soak in the surrounds and enjoy a slice of sporting action in a relaxing atmosphere. The action unfolds intriguingly before you - but at the sort of pace that leaves room to dip in and out a little. In fact I often find it's a great chance to catch up with a friend for a chinwag and today was also a good chance for that - a perfect mix of social and sporting pleasures. Oh and £15 for seven and a half hours? Not bad at all.

So, what of the action? Well, the combination of the cloud cover and green-looking wicket meant Nottinghamshire captain Chris Read was happy to put the visitors from Somerset into bat. It seemed to be a smart move when, before I'd even taken my seat, Vernon Philander removed ex-England opener Marcus Trescothick.

The South African test star has struggled to settle since joining the county but really got his teeth into the action today, with tight probing bowling that maybe deserved even more success than was shown by his final figures of 4-56. Luke Wood ably assisted Philander but Jake Ball and Harry Gurney struggled to keep the pressure on the visitors and it looked like Somerset would head to lunch having seen off the worst of the early morning pressure.

Then up stepped Steven Mullaney. He relished the conditions and made a breakthrough by beating Johann Myburgh for length, just when a half century was in his grasp. His partner James Hildreth then fell to Philander - the third of seven batsmen clean bowled during the day - as the game turned. The icing on the cake for the home side was provided when Tom Cooper came and went - just like that! - for a five-ball one, another victim of Mullaney. 101-5 made it Notts' morning.

After a nice lunch time pint - the Belhaven Golden Bay in the Pavilion - I expected (and hoped) Chris Read's men might turn the screw and limit the visitors to at least below 250, but it wasn't to be.

Some excellent aggressive hitting from Peter Trego (41) and that perennial fly in the ointment James Allenby (64) wrestled control back for Somerset, their efforts taking them to 241-8 before James Overton strode to the crease and stole the show.

The tall number 10 powered his way to the sort of quick scoring innings that wouldn't have been amiss in a Twenty20, with 11 4s in an impressive 31-ball 55. It was only when Gurney finally bowled full and straight that his damaging knock came to an end after tea. Still, when Luke Wood smashed Tim Groenewald's stumps to finish the innings off, Somerset would surely have been delighted with their total of 312.

Notts then faced a tricky 24 overs before the end of the day. Steven Mullaney seemed to ride his luck a little and, just when he was starting to settle, fell to a slightly harsh looking lbw decision. Debutant Greg Smith then added just 8 before himself falling lbw to a decision that appeared more clear cut.

Then, with two Taylors at the crease, it was a case of toughing it out against some tight bowling from Trego (8-4-17-0) and Groenewald (9-4-16-1). While the early overs gave a few too many 'leave-able' balls to the batsmen, this pair had the bit between their teeth by the end - vociferously appealing a couple of close lbw shouts against Brendan Taylor. As the spectators shivered in increasingly cool conditions and the floodlights were called upon to lift the gloom, both Taylors just about clung on, Brendan ending on 11 off 73 balls.

And that was that. It's probably curious to fans of other sports to leave a day's action with nothing decided but seeing the ultimate result isn't necessary to enjoy the cricket. If the weather forecast is to be believed then it may be a struggle to get a result in this game in the next three days but that didn't matter today. Good cricket, good company and a great setting all made for an enjoyable day. More people ought to learn to love the appeal of this gem of the British summer.