England’s tour of New Zealand may come to be remembered for two things: the dropping of Matthew Hoggard and Steve Harmison, and the emergence of Stuart Broad as a Test cricketer of substance.

The dramatic decision to revamp the bowling in mid-series has been fully vindicated. There may be no dropping Broad now, and therefore the chances of a recall for either Hoggard or Harmison become that much more remote.

As England pushed on for match and series victory on the fourth day in Napier, Broad – the youngest man in the team at 21 – proved to be easily their most influential player.

First he scored some bright and breezy runs ahead of the declaration in the morning, then later nailed down one end with some terrifically accurate and spicy bowling that provided the perfect complement to Monty Panesar’s spin from the other (rather in the way Harmison has done in the past).

Broad held a tricky skier to remove Matthew Bell, who had taken root for the first time in the series, and extracted Matthew Sinclair and Grant Elliott with judicious use of the short ball. On the first day, he had provided great support for Ryan Sidebottom during a spell of 13 overs broken by tea; now, he did the same for Panesar with a spell split by the tea interval of 14-5-28-2.

This must have been a sight to make Michael Vaughan’s heart sing. With the Ashes-winning bowlers of 2005 fading away, England need genuine star talent to come forward if they are to have any chance when Australia tour next year. And here was Broad looking every bit the relentless inquisitor in the style of Glenn McGrath. His philosophy is McGrath-like in its simplicity: apply pressure by giving nothing away, and wait for the mistakes. It has worked a treat here.

By the close, Broad’s tally for a match that is easily his best for England stood at 73 runs, five wickets, two catches and one spat (Stephen Fleming took exception to his histrionics after he nearly beat Matthew Bell).

Broad’s rapid progress on this tour may be highly encouraging for England but it must worry Hoggard and Harmison, particularly if Andrew Flintoff is able to return to Test cricket in the near future and bowl without pain.

Until Flintoff’s batting improves enough for him to once again bat at No6 (if that time ever comes), he may be best placed at seven as part of a four-man bowling attack. If that is the case, the four bowlers might well be Flintoff, Broad, Sidebottom and Panesar. And a lower batting order of Flintoff at seven, Tim Ambrose at eight and Broad at nine would be very strong – and very attractive to the selectors.

Although conditions were in his favour, Broad batted with real style in the morning for his unbeaten 31. There is real pedigree in the way he holds a bat, as one would expect from the son of a frontline Test batsman, and it is very hard to see why the selectors would ever consider leaving out Broad in favour of Hoggard or Harmison unless his bowling is seriously off colour.

Above all, Vaughan will want Broad in his side because his gifts are exceptional for one so young, and he is so clearly hungry for the big time. England may just have unearthed an absolute diamond.

Explore Cricket

• Counties