A non-event

It would be wrong to suggest that Mark Butcher has never known a day like today - at Edgbaston in 2001, his criminally under-used outswingers picked up four Australian wickets in six overs. But he is unlikely ever to have it quite so easy again. Well, not until next week's second Test, at any rate.

Of all the excuses used to justify this tour of England, the need to nurture what little that remains of Zimbabwe cricket's infrastructure was the most plausible. On this evidence, sadly, there is nothing left to salvage. Andy Flower's retirement always threatened to be an insurmountable loss, but even he couldn't have expected quite such a capitulation. Nineteen Zimbabwean wickets were lost in a single day's play - not even Bangladesh set their sights so low.

What makes the result all the more disappointing, is that Zimbabwe actually played above themselves for the first day and a half. What might have happened had England won the toss and bowled first under that blanket of first-day cloud? Butcher, one suspects, would not have been given a look-in.

How then, do England assess their performance? It will be tough for the selectors to draw any conclusions whatsoever, especially as England are not used to taking on opponents other than Australia, South Africa and West Indies. The contrast between this cakewalk and the life-in-the-fast-lane of the Ashes tour could not be starker. Marcus Trescothick and Matthew Hoggard were two of the most exposed players against Australia, but here they were two of the most composed. Michael Vaughan's embarrassed struggle for runs is somehow a more apt commentary.

The biggest red herring of the Test, however, was Anthony McGrath's transformation into a world-beating allrounder. As debuts go, McGrath played a blinder, and his deceptive seamers are bound to have a role in future partnership breakings. But if Andrew Flintoff recovers in time for the second Test at Durham, it will be Rob Key who is in danger of being squeezed out of the team, and all because of one poor umpiring decision. Key earned Australia's respect in the winter, and does not deserve to be marginalised. The Australian way (as Stuart Law can testify) would be for the stand-in to stand down, but will the selectors be able to recognise this match as a non-event?

There is one issue, however, that transcends the mediocrity of the opposition. Over the years, English cricket has encountered enough false messiahs to fill the Sinai Desert, so what on earth are we to make of the latest and most convincing applicant yet - James Anderson?

Only last week, a 37-year-old chain-smoking former Middlesex spinner was being touted as the saviour of the game, so it's a little early to get carried away. But there is something about Anderson - his pace, his demeanour, his movement through the air - that few other candidates have ever pulled together into one package. In one sizzling spell after lunch, he wrote himself into the annals of Lord's history, and reassuringly, the balls with which he took his wickets would have troubled any batsman in the world.

But equally reassuring, he struggled to make an impact in the second innings. The sky is the limit for Anderson, but it is just as well he is given the odd reminder along the way, that not everything will go his way at all times. Even against Zimbabwe.