PIETERSEN'S SELECTIONS LOOK GOOD, BUT IT'S TIME TO LAUNCH BROAD TO 6

On paper, yesterday’s England team selection for the fourth and final test against South Africa at the Oval appears nonsensical. After the debacle that was Pattinson at Headingley, and the seemingly crazy gamble of Collingwood at Edgbaston, surely the time was right for England to opt for someone in form, Ravi Bopara, to aid a batting line up that has looked fragile in the extreme in recent times.


Recent first innings scores of 203 and 231, the latter in what can only be described as perfect batting conditions, indicates that it is England’s batting which is letting them down, and that it is that same line up which therefore needs strengthening. Thus the selection of both Harmison and Broad, giving England five bowlers, seems strange. However, all is not as it seems. Although England can be seen to have been one appeal away from winning the last test, (where Graeme Smith clearly gloved Panesar to short leg while on 86), the fact is that once either injury or fatigue removed Sidebottom from the attack in the second innings, England looked desperately short of options. While Panesar wheeled away from one end, Flintoff and Anderson had no choice but to operate by themselves in tandem from the other, and by 3 o’clock Flintoff looked exhausted. A bowler like him works best when allowed to operate in short bursts, but England’s short staffed bowling line up meant that in time his bowling was robbed, through tiredness of all its pace and hostility. Furthermore, South Africa’s 522 in their first innings at Headingley, following up 393-3 in their second innings at Lord’s, indicates that England’s bowling too is flawed, and five bowlers are definitely required as a minimum.

This does seem to leave England’s batting desperately thin. However, this is not the case for England’s five bowler line up as much as it might be for others, for one reason. England have not one, but two all rounders. While Flintoff was in woeful form with the bat, he has recently looked to have re discovered some form, though doubts do remain about his ability against spin. It is Stuart Broad’s batting however, which has been a revelation. It has not just been his recent scores which have made an impact, 76 and 67 not out against South Africa, to follow up two other fifties late on in the series against New Zealand, but more the manner of them. These innings contained none of the slogs which typically dominate a batsman’s innings when either his team are in a dominant position (Lord’s) or a hopeless one (Headingley) but rather were made up of a combination of straight bat back foot drives and sweet timing off the legs. These were the shots of a proper batsman and moreover one who appears to be improving with every game. With this is mind then, the unnerving presence of Ian Bell at three and Paul Collingwood at 5 should be alleviated by England’s strength in depth. The only real issue is that Broad, despite his obvious ability is currently set to bat at 8, which is at least one, if not two places too low. Tim Ambrose is clearly struggling with the rigours of test cricket, with South Africa’s bowlers not dishing up the short and wide balls which feed what is in reality his only shot, the square cut. He averaged just 2.5 in five innings in the one day series against New Zealand and his most recent innings of 19 off 100 balls was a tortured affair and one far more resembling that of a tail ender, though admittedly one with a solid defence, trying to hold up an end than of a proper wicketkeeper/batsman.

There can be no doubt that Broad is a far better batsman, and indeed it is hard to see why he should not bat ahead of Flintoff, who is clearly more useful at 7, where his immense power can come in useful with the tail. Flintoff’s batting is nowhere near where it was in 2005, where the no. 6 slot was appropriate, and Broad, in the form he is in would do better to fill that position and be given a chance to bat with the proper batsmen and prove his worth, rather than being cruelly stranded three quarters of the way to a hundred, as he was at Headingley.

In terms of the personnel then, England’s selection is in fact justified, and Harmison in particular is a good choice given that fast aggressive bowling and bounce have proved more useful in unsettling the South African top order, as Flintoff showed in the last test with his four top order wickets, than has swing bowling, which, in the absence of Hoggard, England have somewhat lost the knack of. However, with few batsmen to play with, England can surely ill afford to have a player who is top of England’s batting averages, with 80, and who has scored 160 runs behind only Cook Bell and Pietersen, who have all played a match more in the series, languishing at no.8.