I've loved Jarrod Kimber's writing for a long time and the narratives that he weaves together, so I was very excited to read this book. Unfortunately though it was a very interesting read, it didn't quite meet the standard I expected from his articles. He seemed to find some difficulty in expanding his style to longer narratives, and the thing that was most distracting was the jumping around in chronology got too distracting at points.
I know that putting the reader in media res, and then giving backstory and then returning to the action is often a highly effective technique to tying ideas together, but it can get too muddled if there's too much detail in a short place. Sometimes he'll tell you the story of a match, cut that off, give you backstory, and then in the process of giving you backstory tell you the story of another match, and then jump back into the other match he was talking about. Sometimes this can make all the figures quoted confusing and adrift from context.
The book is structured to basically tell the story of the first match where a team beat England. Well, more or less. Occasionally it isn't the first match per se but the first one on a big stage, or that people took notice of. The basic rule of thumb seems to be that it's the match with the best story attached. I think it would have been more easily readable if the chapters were bifurcated into the story of the team and players, and then the narrative of the match itself, rather than intertwining them so much.
Another oddity that I suppose can't be helped much, is the different styles of writing used in the first and back half of the book due to the different periods involved. Matches from 100+ years ago, of course, rely on cricket writing and historical research. For the more recent matches, such as Scotland and the Netherlands, Kimber has interviewed all of the very much still alive players, and some of the chapters are dominated by their quotes. These add insight, but do make the back half of the book feel less narrative driven. Of course, we also have full video ball by ball coverage of these games, so there isn't any mystery to be teased out. I don't think there was a real solution but it is an odd element to the book.
In the end notes of the book, it mentions that Jarrod Kimber had some sort of injury when writing and needed lots of help finishing the book as a result. Unfortunately, this does show. The proofreading is patchy enough to be distracting - lots of little words are missing in sentences, and there's a strange grammatical preference for short individual single clause sentences. Instead of using commas. Which is the more common choice.
The book was still enjoyable, and Kimber's knowledge and humour shines through. I did enjoy reading it quite a lot, even if it was a bit less than I'd hoped. If 3.5 stars was an option that's what I'd have given this book.