England vs. New Zealand: Live coverage

Now that ball-by-ball coverage is the next Big Thing (can be found here, here and here), AYALAC needs to get in on the act.

Although, we don’t have the energy to fit in front of the computer and telly at the same time, so AYALAC sent along one of our correspondents. Here are the first of his reports:

Start

“Morning. Spots of rain already at the street. Should they really play cricket this far North?”

Interesting question, which suggests a more fundamental problem: should anything happen that far North?

England 100-3

“Bell did well. Pietersen is steady; Colly good. Very enjoyable. Beer good.”

But not enough, I fear. But not enough.

England 200-3

“England have the advantage. KP played well for an English Saffer. General consensus is Harmison is a twat and DFID needs restructuring.”

Things are getting political oop Narth. I suggest that insufficient beer is being consumed.

“True. I’ve given up and reading the Observer. I hope to bring is back n the second session. Have they always played music at one days? WTF?”

WTF indeed.

England managed 307-5 in their 50 overs. Things have gone a bit quiet, so I've asked what's going on...

New Zealand 72-3.

"Not sure. I've just woken up. It seems New Zealand have tried to bore us all to death. The crowd was buzzing, but everyone seems hypotised."

140-5

"Mini riot in the barmy army stand. New Zealand grinding out a loss. Hairybottom hair isn't that bad in real life. Gus O'Donnel needs tighter control of the civil service."

England win by 114 runs.

"A pleasant afternoon in the North. England were average, nothing special. New Zealand were rubbish. KP played well. He is suprisingly tall. Crowd and beer were good."

Well, I hope you enjoyed that. It was straight from the horses mouth. Proper journalism, is that.