England Issued Stuart Broad Warneing

Watching him bowl was an unforgettable experience, listening to him commentate is refreshing, and reading his articles is always worthwhile - even if it's sometimes advisable to have a bowl of salt to hand, with fingers in pinching position.

Shane Warne, in his Times column today, has warned England that they are in danger of 'ruining' one of their most promising young stars, Stuart Broad, providing he bats - as looks likely - at No 7 in South Africa.

He said: "If England want to ruin Stuart Broad, it strikes me that they may be going the right way about it. [Batting at No 7] could be the worst thing to happen to the guy.

I'm not bagging Broad, because he has the makings of being a good player. He is a decent bowler and a reasonable batsman - just not an international all-rounder. By thinking that he is, England risk taking his focus away from what he is learning to do well: first and foremost to support frontline bowlers, then to chip in with runs."

I'd apply the pinch of salt to the "makings of a good player" part. Broad has proved a match winner on several occasions in his short career so far, making important contributions with bat and ball. He's one of England's good players, the question is, how much better can he get?

If Warne drew on his own experience in writing this article, then it's barely applicable. He played in Test teams who almost always named their wicket-keeper at No 7. The second half of his Test career coincided with the emergence of a certain Adam Gilchrist, who single-handedly changed the job spec of the wicket-keeper forever, in making 12 hundreds from No 7 and even one from No 8.

Gilchrist's predecessor in the Australia team, and their keeper/No 7 for the first half of Warne's 145 appearances in the baggy green, was Ian Healy. Though made to look decidedly human when compared to Gilchrist, his batting average, after the last of his 119 Tests, was a respectable 27.39. After 22 matches, Stuart Broad's stands at 30.68.

It would be easy for England to 'ruin' Stuart Broad, but I think that a step up the batting order is some way down the list of possible ways how. Too much cricket - let's hope he's rested for the Bangladesh tour - and expecting Oval-like performances every match are more dangerous threats to England's brightest young talent.

Having him at seven is not ideal, but nor is not having a genuine Test-class all-rounder, and at present England don't.

One of Warne's arguments is that Broad at No 7 heaps too much pressure on him. On his batting maybe, but in allowing another bowler in the team it should have the opposite effect on his primary weapon. A 7, 8, 9 of Prior, Broad and Swann sounds perfect, but that would leave Broad as one of four front-line bowlers; a prospect South Africa's supreme batting line-up would surely relish.

The balance of the side is a key issue going into the South Africa series, and if Broad at No 7 works, England will have unlocked the answer. If it doesn't, he's shown enough character so far in his England career to suggest that one failed experiment wont 'ruin' him for good.