Stick, or twist
A love of cricket introduced a teenage Spin to a number of words that did not tend to feature in the discourse of Sittingbourne High Street. Apocryphal, subcontinent, amidships – and myopia. The England selectors were accused of it so often during the late 1980s and early 1990s that it only seemed right to look it up and then gratuitously insert it into an English Lit essay in an attempt to look clever. Things have changed since then: we know about the essential futility of trying to look clever, and England selection is far more stable – so much so that it would be nice if the selectors were accused of the opposite, hyperopia, this summer.
All things being equal, England will beat Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Medium-term considerations, particularly the tours of India this winter and Australia in 2017-18, should inform their selections as much as the immediate need to win both series. That’s not complacency, just common sense. Taking one game at a time is a largely meaningless cliche. The imaginary game against Mars to save the world hasn’t happened yet, and for the most part teams are selected with consideration for the future as well as the present. It is a necessary and deceptively complex juggling act.
It is not beyond the realms England could win all seven Tests, like Michael Vaughan’s team did against New Zealand and West Indies in 2004. Sri Lanka are inexperienced and in transition after the retirement of Kumar Sangakkara and Mahela Jayawardene, with their batting hugely dependent on Angelo Mathews and Dinesh Chandimal. Pakistan are a tougher side under the extraordinary Misbah-ul-Haq, but they have not played a Test outside Asia for three years and their batsmen are unlikely to enjoy English conditions.
All this is not to advocate wild experimentation for the sake of it. The Spin would only make one change to the side that won the third Test against South Africa, and that is because of the hugely unfortunate retirement of James Taylor. In the real world, however, England could have three new batsmen in the top five for the first Test against Sri Lanka, with another, Joe Root, potentially changing position.
That would mean dropping Alex Hales and Nick Compton. Hales had a poor series in South Africa; Compton had a middling series that was painted as poor by many because of the strange and unfair prejudice towards him. The Spin would keep both of them for now. Although there are legitimate doubts about Hales’ ability at Test level, his potential is so great that it would be wrong to end or undermine his career by dropping him so early – especially as South Africa away is a particularly hard tour for an opening batsman to make his debut. The Sri Lanka series would take Hales to seven Tests, the same number given to Sam Robson and Adam Lyth. Ideally he would continue into the Pakistan series, with England only making a change if they think he is not going to go to Bangladesh and India at the end of the year.
Hales could feasibly end his Test career with an average anywhere between 10 and 50. Compton is the opposite. You suspect his average will be in the low to mid-thirties, whether his career ends now or in five years’ time. In isolation that is not quite good enough, but in context it is fine. Compton reduces England’s chances of top-order collapse and offers an important contrast to all the other dashers. England need a man to sex down their young, expressive middle order. Compton is 33 in June, three years younger than the Bradmanesque Adam Voges, and could be a very important player for the next three or four years. He did more than enough in the first two-and-a-half Tests in South Africa to retain his place.
It has been suggested that the uncapped pair of Nick Browne and James Vince could come in for Hales and Compton, with Gary Ballance replacing Taylor at No5. A number of other batsmen, including Robson, Mark Stoneman, Ian Bell and Daniel Bell-Drummond, will struggle to sit still in the 24 hours before the squad announcement.
The decision over Compton is likely to determine whether Root is pushed up to No3. There can be risks with moving a prolific batsman, as Michael Clarke showed: he averaged 61 at No5 and 31 at No4. There was no logical reason for that, but the mind can have, er, a mind of its own when it comes to feeling comfortable in one particular environment.
Root struggled as opener and at No3 against Australia in 2013-14, though he was an unfinished article then. His ability and confidence are so powerful that he seems unlikely to have similar problems again. There is, however, no need to take the risk. Many all-time greats, including Sachin Tendulkar, Martin Crowe and Javed Miandad, hardly ever ventured higher than No4.
It is often said that a batsman should do what is best for the team, and ideally Root, as England’s premier batsman, would bat at No3. But what is really best for the team is Root scoring runs in industrial quantities. If he is even vaguely uneasy with moving up to No3 – and it sounds like he is - that might compromise his output. There is an easy solution: ask him where he wants to bat, and put him there. Root is a rare example of a batsman you really should build your team around.
The bowling attack picks itself. Moeen Ali, despite his odd and statistically unfulfilling utility role, is England’s best option as spinner. Jimmy Anderson, Stuart Broad, Steven Finn and Ben Stokes were exceptional at times in the winter, with Finn particularly magnificent. If they stay fit, and if there is bounce and sideways movement, we will surely see at least one team score down in the double figures.
There is another option for England: to not replace Taylor at all. In India they will need at least two spinners; possibly more if India replicate the vicious turners on which they trounced South Africa. If last winter’s Pakistan series is anything to go by, they will want six bowlers plus Root. Why not have that balance this summer? There is one huge advantage: it gives the second spinner, probably Adil Rashid, seven Tests’ experience, which is far more important than a few extra runs from a batsman who would be dropped in the winter anyway.
Such a decision would weaken the batting, but England would still have Moeen at No7, Rashid at No8 and Broad at No9. There is an argument that having too many batsmen creates a subconscious laziness, and this would give greater responsibility to both Moeen and Stokes, who could move to No5. It was in that position that Sir Ian Botham made his highest Test score, and averaged 53.
Things will change in the next six months; they always do. If Monty Panesar’s rehabilitation is a success he should play in India, but that would be a bonus and is not something England can reasonably plan for. At this stage they will have an idea of the XI they would like to pick for the first Test in India. Whatever that team is, it should also start against Sri Lanka.
The Spin’s XI for the first Test against Sri Lanka: Cook, Hales, Compton, Root, Stokes, Bairstow, Moeen, Rashid, Broad, Finn, Anderson.
• This is an extract taken from the Spin, the Guardian’s weekly cricket email. To subscribe just visit this page, find ‘The Spin’ and follow the instructions.
