The Inbox

July 28, 2009
Posted on 07/28/2009 in Ashes
Is Ian Bell a better fit at No. 5?

From Benjamin Matthews, United Kingdom





Ian Bell is pragmatically the best replacement for Pietersen © Getty Images

This Test is possibly the fulcrum of the series and so momentum will no doubt be the buzz word around the England dressing-room at present. Come Thursday as two patched up teams move to Edgbaston, both sides will be looking to try to exploit weaknesses apparent within each camp.

For Australia, concerns about Phillip Hughes and Mitchell Johnson will need to be addressed, while the loss of Kevin Pietersen has posed the English team noticeable issues in the middle order. If Australia are to seize the initiative in this series, a win is pivotal at a ground where of the 43 Tests staged, England have won 22.

England have handed a Test lifeline to Ian Bell, brought in to replace Pietersen. Bell is a batsman of undisputed talent; a classical stroke-maker with a honed technique, solid enough to slot in at No. 3, possibly the most difficult of Test batting positions. Many expect Bell to be inserted at first-wicket down to allow a visibly less-than-comfortable Ravi Bopara to drop down a place or two to repair his fractured confidence by way of facing the older ball.

Bopara has looked unsettled in the first two Tests; batting at an irregular tempo without his usual verve and swagger at the crease. Bell, with his tighter technique and impressive county form, appears a sound choice to replace a player who is showing signs of mental and technical fatigue at first drop. While such an order change seems to be the consensus, England must resist the temptation to do so as this would be to the detriment of both men.

Bopara possesses the character to recover his form and succeed at No. 3 where an ability to exert one’s personality on an innings is crucial. Bopara has the potential to dictate the pace and rhythm of an innings, in a manner that no other English batsman currently does. The selectors strive for continuity and so must persevere with Bopara at three.

Bell is a batsman who tends to bat successfully in the slipstream of more dominant batsmen. Add to that, a moderate Test record at No. 3 (averaging 31) and a tendency to compound an innings in the middle order show why Bell will fit better at No. 5 (where he has unfinished business, averaging 54.4).





Ravi Bopara possesses the character to recover his form and succeed at No. 3 © Getty Images

A steely Paul Collingwood, having scored a double-century against the Australians batting at No. 4 in 2006, should not have too many qualms about being asked to bat one position higher.

So is Bell the correct choice? He has responded to the request from the England hierarchy to show “more hunger” this season, scoring runs at an average of 64.70 across 13 innings, but have the selectors shown a lack of trust in the county game, or is there simply a dearth of talent to choose from?

Bell, with the experience of two Ashes series behind him is pragmatically perhaps the best option, but poor records in both of these series (502 runs at 25.10) have prompted a number of different names to be put forward for consideration, if only to provide batting cover for the Edgbaston Test.

Bell’s Warwickshire team-mate Jonathan Trott has lodged a firm case for selection, having scored 101 more runs than Bell over the same number of innings this season, and what with batting at No. 4, would have represented a straight swap for Pietersen.

The Kent pair Rob Key and Joe Denly are names often bandied about but both, alongside Worcestershire’s Stephen Moore, would be forced to bat out of position if selected. As with Trott and Moore, the selectors would be loathe to hand out a Test debut in the middle of an Ashes series, and Denly’s time should come. Key’s time may have passed in the longer format of the game, as may the oft-overlooked Owais Shah and the popular choice of Mark Ramprakash. If the selectors want to look towards the future, then James Hildreth and Eoin Morgan are two emerging names who could produce a big impact in the middle order and who would benefit from being part of an Ashes squad as spare batting options.

All of these opinions are heresy due to Bell’s inclusion, but Adil Rashid is a final name worth a mention. To include Rashid would require Andrew Flintoff to be shunted up the order to No. 6, and so would result in an even loftier weight of responsibility on the Lancastrian’s broad shoulders. England’s bowling attack would be strengthened, but the batting unit would suffer and the attack regained a ruthlessness at Lord’s that was absent in Cardiff.

Of the unit, Flintoff, Graeme Swann and James Anderson are certainties for the third Test but one of Graham Onions and Stuart Broad could yet make way for an apparently rejuvenated Steve Harmison. England may try to replicate the performance from Harmison and Onions when they bowled Durham to victory at Edgbaston earlier in the season. The plan to forge home the advantage may leave Broad on the sidelines as he is yet to find his true character as a bowler, sometimes appearing indecisive about how to bowl in certain situations.

Having said that, England are unlikely to tamper with an attack that produced 20 wickets at Lord’s, and with a traditionally partisan Edgbaston crowd acting as a 12th man, England remain in a strong position despite the loss of Pietersen.

Comments (7)
Posted by: Sally Bingham at July 28, 2009 4:34 PM

With insight like this Benjamin, don't you think that you owe it to the England selectors to mail them a copy post haste! An excellent and informative read for a relative novice in the field, thank you.

Posted by: Paul Clarke at July 28, 2009 10:41 PM

Maybe you are right. Unfortunately Bopara is not a number 3 against real class. Yes he scored those hundreds, but so far this summer, against the Aussies, he's looked very loose. That might be alright against Powell, Benn and Gail. But not any more. England do not have a decent number 3, Vaughan was the last decent number 3, and Hussain before him, then probably back as far as Gower. Key is proabably the best fit at three (no pun intended). Bell number 5 ? Yeah give him a go, I don't think he'll succeed though

Posted by: dank at July 29, 2009 3:37 AM

Am I correct i saying that if they play Rashid, as you've suggested as one option, Prior would be at 5 and Flintoff at 6 with England playing 6 bowlers and only 4 legitimate batmen?

As an Australian I'd like to see that team roll out at Edgbaston.

But I think from an England point of view Collingwood should be at 4 and Harmison should be in for the flat looking Broad.

Posted by: Mahadevan at July 29, 2009 11:26 AM

I accept your comments with respect to Bopara at no3 but Owais shah would have been the best candidate for the no5 position. Being a free flowing batsman, Shah has shown his prowess in limited over cricket and would have been an apt replacement for pietersen when the situation demands attacking cricket. Similarly, Harmison should replace Broad, anyone who had watched harmy bowl in the tour match would have naturally named him in the final XI. Moreover Stuart Broad has not done anything extraordinary in this series (Wkts:4, Str.rt:99, Eco:3.87) in order to deserve the backing of the selectors.
Nice read......Continue the good work.

Posted by: Benjamin Matthews at July 30, 2009 9:03 AM

Cheers for all the positive feedback guys, it is much appreciated.

Mahadevan; I think that Owais Shah should have been given a longer run in the team and personally have no problems with him at no.5. I think you are right that, once settled at the crease, he is fluent, confident and positive. I just have a horrible feeling that the selectors will continue to overlook him, and that his moment may have passed unfortunately.

dank; the Rashid option was just a suggestion from left-field. England must class Prior as a legitimate batsman due to the alternatives available behind the stumps. As debatable as this is, they will continue to show faith in him and if Rashid fulfills his undoubted promise, then it may be an option for the future.

To both;, Harmison could be better kept in the wings for Headingley if the Edgbaston pitch produces, as expected, a low bouncing, benign pitch. Then again, maybe he is the spark that England need to force a result of a likely shortened four day test?

Posted by: waterbuffalo at July 30, 2009 1:11 PM

Bopara and Bell at 3,4 are sitting ducks. Stuart Clark, if he plays will get a few. How anyone thinks Bopara is a genuine Test Bat, let alone a no. 3 is beyond me. His technique is better suited to Pakistan's top order, and I am a die hard Pak supporter. Bell might be lucky if he survives 40 mins and bats with Collingwood, but I doubt it.

Posted by: Muhammad at August 1, 2009 5:57 AM

Bopara is not suited to play test cricket yet only if he scores some tons I will accept him to the test side but bell i am sure bell will play really well.

Name: Email Address:
Comments: characters left
The Inbox will feature submissions from you with us playing gatekeeper as we do with the rest of the site. We will set no rules apart from ensuring a certain quality that you have come to associate with Cricinfo. You may write on the aspects of the game that you hold dear; about matters that rile you; about players, teams and trends; you may share your memories and views, and you may so do so in 100 words or 500. The only tip we will give you is to repeat a line from our style sheet: Brevity is not just the soul of wit, it is the heart of all writing.
Latest News
Specials
© ESPN EMEA Ltd