Pattinson Not to Blame for English Cricket Shortcomings

Among the hand-wringing and blame about the loss of the Headingley test, two comments from England’s captain and star player revealed more than many others.

“It wasn’t his fault,” consoled Michael Vaughan in response to clamour focussed on Darren Pattinson’s surprise inclusion in the side.

“I felt sorry for Patto,” Kevin Pietersen chipped in. “He didn’t bowl badly at all.”

Much ink has been spilt on this drama, and although Pattinson did not fare any better or worse than some of those whose names aren’t currently crossing the selectors desk, it seems likely he will be out of the frame for Birmingham.

But is it Pattinson whose selection has thrown the cat among the pidgeons? It seems difficult to level this charge when he was a straight replacement for another swing bowler.

What many have overlooked here is the problem Flintoff’s selection brings to the side. As good a player as he is, although mercurial, he doesn’t make enough runs to justify selection as a batsman or take enough wickets to be a strike bowler.

This puts pressure on the bowlers or the batsmen, sometimes both in the same test, to make up in an area where there is now one less out-and-out player.

Similarly with the perennial wicketkeeping debate. Ambrose is not a test match number six, and he makes England’s tail look woefully long in the event of a collapse.

Broad meanwhile isn’t enough wickets, and is threatened with the axe—despite averaging 40 in test cricket.

But with a re-examination of priorities, especially with the batting order, many of these problems could be put behind England.

Unfortunately there is no ready batsmen to come into the side and bolster the batting. Dropping Vaughan for Shah can’t work and, despite Bell's inconsistency, Ramprakash’s eternity to get his hundred centuries shows what pressure does to him.

So the top five should remain broadly similar, although Pietersen should be good enough to bat at three as Ponting does for Australia.

If fit, Sidebottom should play in Birmingham to offer accuracy and variation, while Anderson can be England’s swing bowler. Panesar as spinner is still an automatic selection despite the need to learn more variation in pace and deliveries.

But England should use Flintoff and Broad to plug gaps rather than create them. Broad should use his current form as a sign to move up the order to six, and bowl less. Bowling less overs will also let him reach that 90 mph mark more often, with the steepling bounce other Englandseamers currently lack.

Flintoff should bat seven, and be used as a rotation bowler later in the innings when the ball reverses to frustrate batsmen and maybe get a break through. He has never taken huge hauls, but he can get crucial wickets.

Rejigging the order gives England a more stable batting lineup, but provides enough bowlers to take wickets and prevent Broad and Flintoff being overbowled.

But with a week of storms predicted the one thing England need to do this time is win the toss for once!

This article’s England line up (in order of batting): Strauss, Cook, Pietersen, Vaughan, Bell, Broad, Flintoff, Ambrose, Anderson, Sidebottom, Panesar