I never thought I would say this – at least, not in relation to cricket statistics – but Sachin Tendulkar and I have one thing in common: neither of us has made it on to the honours board at Lord's and, it would appear, neither of us ever will.
There is not much Sachin has failed to do in this sport. His total of runs and number of international centuries mean he will be considered the greatest batsman of all time by some people and rated among the top three or four by just about everybody.
But unless Tendulkar keeps playing into his forties, he will not be able to say he scored a Test hundred at Lord's (or even a Test fifty, which is almost unbelievable). Will it really matter to him, though? I would say most definitely yes.
Once your name is on that board, be it for scoring a century or taking five wickets in an innings, it is there for ever. Players come and players go but the boards stay put and you look at them every time you go into the changing room. They are not only part of the history of Lord's but also part of the history of the game.
I still regret not getting a Test five-for at Lord's, and always will. I managed a few four-fors but never the magic five. You just want your name on that board – simple as that. Being up there means a lot more to most cricketers than many people imagine.
I managed four wickets in an innings on three occasions at Lord's, but perhaps the closest I got to the five-for was against Zimbabwe in 2003. I had three wickets in the first innings but, because we intended to enforce the follow-on, Nasser Hussain took me out of the attack so I was fresh for the second innings. Jimmy Anderson, making his Test debut, promptly bowled out the tail to finish with five.
And how many wickets did I get in the second innings when Zimbabwe did follow on? Yep, you guessed it: none. Thanks, Nas!Reuse content