Sep 7-11, 2017 - 3rd Test at Lord's, London
I'm really enjoying watching a game in which the bowlers are on top; like the Yorkshire cricket of my boyhood.
It's in these conditions that the quality of the batsman can really shine through. I thought Kai Hope was superb last evening. I didn't see much of the Headingley Test, so he came as a bit of a surprise to me. The left-hander Powell was also looking good before he got one from Anderson that would have bowled anyone.
Coincidentally, I was watching live in the Headingley Taps during a rain interruption when Chase was bowled by Stokes in the first innings - a hooping inswinger followed by one that shaped to swing in but then held its own off the seam to hit off stump.
How you're supposed to play that sort of delivery I have no idea.
On the question of light, I too have been frustrated by the apparent inconsistencies of umpires, not only by different umpires in different games, but by the same two umpires in the same game at Headingley, where they seemed to come off simply because it was 6 pm and cold.
But how do you standardise it all? Light-meters, yes, but they measure only the AMOUNT of light, not the visibility of the ball, which is what matters. More light does NOT equate to easier to see - the obvious example being when the sun is directly in your eyes and you can't see a bloody thing!
Then there's the background. Sightscreen for the batsman, but what about the poor lad fielding in the gully, who is likely to get a ball slashed straight at his head from crowd, or trees, or with a white ball against white seats? Surely, only a human umpire can make this judgement; which means inconsistencies are inevitable.