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.

SA Tour: Jones In, Bopara Out?

England are set to recall Geraint Jones as back-up wicketkeeper, and discard Ravi Bopara for the winter tour of South Africa, according to Scyld Berry in The Sunday Telegraph.

Berry points out that Jones, who would replace Tim Ambrose as back-up to Matt Prior, has hit five first-class hundreds this season - more than any England gloveman in the past 25 years.

Bopara's struggles with the bat seem likely to see him dropped from both touring parties, with Berry claiming that "Joe Denly probably needs only one good innings in South Africa this week to become the reserve Test batsman in place of Bopara."

No light was shed on the selectors' thinking regarding the fifth seamer role - billed as a tussle between Durham colleagues Liam Plunkett and Steve Harmison.

Fourth ODI (v Aus) Reaction: Selectors' Hands Tied

Australia won by 7 wickets (with 38 balls remaining). Australia win the series.

England freshened up today's line-up a bit, but not enough, as Australia claimed an unassailable 4-0 lead.

In came Denly, Broad and Rashid for Swann and the rested duo of Paul Collingwood and James Anderson. Except that in the Sky commentary box neither Michael Holding nor Sir Ian Botham could believe they were being rested. Both were at pains to point out that Collingwood has 'only' played 77 days cricket so far this year. Surely they're missing the point; since the new year he's been away in the Caribbean playing Test and ODI series before embarking on a summer of seven home Tests, more ODIs and a stint captaining his country at the World T20. Atherton stood tall for the batting fraternity, suggesting all that may have taken a mental toll, but Holding was having none of it. 77 days of England duty on the pitch it may have been, but it's been at least that or more off it. I don't begrudge Collingwood a rest ahead of the Champions Trophy, in fact, I called for it after the third ODI.

Strauss winning the toss has become as inevitable as England's batting collapsing. He chose to bat first, giving Denly a chance to impress, which he did in part. 11 off 17 balls in 20 minutes is hardly the stuff of dreams, but he did offer a glimpse of hope. First ball nerves were dispelled with a leg-side clip for four, and he's got the first one out of the way. If he can find his feet over the next three matches, England will at least head to the Champions Trophy with a settled opening pair.

Again only Strauss (63) and Shah (39) offered any resistance as England squandered their best start of the series. After 16 overs they were 89-1, which though not headline-worthy does represent an improvement.

Matt Prior's struggles with the bat reflect those of his team. At present he's not translating his Test fluency and expansive shot play to the shorter game. Today he batted at four, meaning he's now batted everywhere from one to nine in ODIs (except five), though as Scyld Berry Points out in The Telegraph, come February, England are likely to install Craig Kieswetter. How we could do with his hitting now.

Brett Lee produced the outstanding performance of the series in claiming five wickets for 49, four of them clean bowled. Sometimes you have to just admire an opponents performance, and having watched the Ashes from the sidelines, Lee is unleashing his frustration in style. That is forgivable, the treatment - or rather non-treatment - of Hauritz less so.

He's clearly a tidy bowler - better than his career stats suggest - but he must be loving how cagily England are dealing with him. They didn't even try going after him - as his economy rate of 2.30 suggests - and with Lee on fire at the other end, this proved fatal. When the opposition are turning their potential weaknesses into strengths, it's time for changes.

Or at least it would be if the Champions Trophy squad hadn't already been announced. Bringing in fresh faces now would be counter productive - England must find their solution with this crop of players. Were this not the case, the likes of Mascarenhas, Lumb, Bell and Trott would all be in with a shout. The CT squad was named before Trott's Ashes heroics, but his unflappable temperament and a one-day average in the fourties suggests he'll feature in the winter tour to South Africa.

On to Trent Bridge, where Stuart Broad destroyed the South Africans last year.

Central Contracts: Harmison And Panesar Dropped

Despite Andy Flower reiterating that "central contracts don't decide selection - performances do," there are signs in yesterday's central contracts announcement of the direction in which England will head over the coming year. Onions, Swann and Prior - three of England's leading lights in the last twelve months - have been awarded full contracts for the first time. Panesar and Harmison - along with Patel, Ambrose and the retired Michael Vaughan - have lost theirs.

Ian Bell also received one of the eleven full-time deals - an indication he'll be on the teamsheet for the first Test in South Africa, though hopefully at four, with KP moving up to three.

With their contracts taken away, the onus is firmly on Panesar and Harmison, and neither can have many complaints. The former has slipped behind Adil Rashid in the pecking order, who, with his all-round skills will be hard to overtake. Harmison does not have the threat of a like-for-like replacement breathing down his neck. The news will test his hunger, his options being retire now or add another chapter to his jekyll and hyde England career.

Full Contracts

Anderson, Bell, Broad, Collingwood, Cook, Onions, Pietersen, Prior, Sidebottom, Strauss, Swann

Incremental Contracts

Bopara, Bresnan, Flintoff, Rashid, Shah, Trott, Wright

Third ODI (v Aus) Reaction

Australia won by 6 wickets.

Strauss opted to bat first, hoping for a different story. Instead all we got was variations on a theme.

England's is a batting line-up out of form. Strauss - as he has done all summer - has demonstrated fluency, but at present, he's alone in his contentment with his own game. His teammates are wrestling with theirs.

None more so than Bopara. Potentially a dashing striker of the ball in limited overs cricket - recall his T20 exploits at the start of the summer - he is currently consumed with fear in pursuing his natural game, but clearly frustrated by the alternative. The end result has been 86 scratchily put together runs in three games.

Prior has lost his form completely, leading most to the easy conclusion that he experiences altitude sickness coming in at number three. Maybe true in normal circumstances, but as a natural stroke player in a Pietersen-less side, the idea had potential. Shah has looked closest to Strauss in terms of touch, but has been shackled by a run of bad luck, not all of his making.

Collingwood has made a successful career out of scratchy innings at Test level, enabling him to dispell his 'one-day specialist' tag. But he acquired that tag originally for good reason - an ability to adapt to limited-overs situations as required, be it nudging and nurdling or consistent boundary hitting. There has been little of the latter in recent times. Should really be given the rest of the series off if the management are to expect anything from him in the Champions Trophy.

Add these elements to an equation and it's no wonder the outcome has thus far been lop-sided. The imminent Champions Trophy has effectively ruled out the possible solution of drafting in fresh blood.

England's Misfiring Top Order

Ahead of the second ODI against Australia at Lord's tomorrow, Strauss has called upon the top order to contribute more runs, and in doing so has highlighted his teams' main problem across all forms of the game.

He said, "If you want to win consistently one of your top four or five needs to get hundreds more often than not. That is an area we are looking to an address."

They're focussing their attention on the right area.

The bowling unit is in good shape, and has depth - it restricted Australia to 260 yesterday, and enabled England to win the Ashes, despite their inferior batting. Indeed, the likes of Swann, Broad, Anderson and yesterday Rashid, have contributed with the bat too and in doing so, disguised, to some extent, the frailty of the specialist batting line-up.

Take the Ashes series. Of the seven innings in which every member of the team batted, the players selected for their batting alone (numbers one to five in the batting order) - were outscored by the all-rounders and bowlers (numbers six to eleven, plus extras) on five occasions, coming out on top just twice. Take extras out of the equation and the non-specialist batsmen still come out on top, four-three.

The Ashes averages back-up this evidence. Removing KP and Trott, who played two and one Tests respectively, leaves Andrew Strauss as the only specialist batsman - though you could argue that as captain, he's an all-rounder - in the top four; where he's joined by Swann, Flintoff and Prior - all primarily in the side to fulfill a different role.

The problem resurfaced yesterday in the 50 over game. Ideally, one of a team's specialist batsman would make a century once in every three/four - five at the most - ODIs. A side would expect at least three half-centuries in the absence of a three figure score. No Englishman passed 50 yesterday, which is no basis on which to expect to win a match.

It's not all bad news for England though. Their tail are wagging like never before, and gone are the days when they stutter from being six wickets down to all out in under five overs. James Anderson is as decent a Test number 11 as England have ever had.

Also, when their top batsmen do perform, they win. The two occasions when the specialist batsmen did outdo their all-rounder/bowling team-mates in the Ashes, were at Lord's and The Oval. So either England should play all their matches in London, or concentrate on sorting out their top order - something which Jonathan Trott's immediate success has ensured will happen anyway. Factor in too that England were without their best batsman for 60 per cent of the series, and Strauss may soon be blessed with the improvement he seeks.

This Time Last Year...

England were completing a 4-0 ODI series win against South Africa - now arguably the best side in the world - with only rain in Cardiff preventing a 5-0 whitewash and a leap up to second in the world rankings. Peter Moores's England were remarkably dominant in this series, and, had a World Cup been scheduled for September, would have fancied their chances. Pietersen, the newly appointed captain, and Flintoff were rampant, but England carried no passengers; every single member of the team made telling contributions.

As an opening partnership, Bell and Prior failed only once and England seemed to have solved a lingering problem. The depth of the whole batting line-up was such that from the second match onwards Luke Wright batted at eight, with Stuart Broad at nine. Crucially, such firepower did not come at the expense of the bowling armoury, which consisted of Anderson, Flintoff, Broad, Patel and Harmison with Collingwood and KP if needed. Only the four frontline quicks were called upon at Trent Bridge, where Broad produced one of those spells (5-23) and the tourists, victors in the Test series a few weeks earlier, were dismissed for 83.

But England failed to cash in on this undoubted momentum, and ended up on the wrong end of a 5-0 whitewash a few months later in India. One-day cricket inconsistency had reared its ugly head once more.

T20 Squad Reaction

The selectors have drawn the following conclusions from the World T20 in June; they've dropped Mascarenhas, Key, Foster and Napier, and called up Trott, Prior, Denly and Bresnan for the upcoming games against Australia. Flintoff returns from injury, whilst KP has succumbed to it.

I think they've got all four of the form-related changes right. Mascarenhas has never done much wrong for England, but it could be argued he hasn't quite done enough right since his debut two summers ago.

It would be unfair to judge Key on his sole World T20 appearance - the ill-fated tournament opener against the Netherlands - and with a career T20 average just shy of 30 and captaincy credentials he deserves his place on the selectors radar. But in a way, despite being capped just once in the format, he is synonymous with England - good, but not quite good enough.

Foster was a success at the World T20 in keeping terms, but was one of a band of middle order hitters who came up short. At the time I felt there was a case for including him and Prior (as a batsman), but the latter's glovework in the two months since suggests England can dispense with Foster.

England's unwillingness to use Napier probably says it all. Certainly one to monitor - as anyone capable of scoring a 20 over 150 should be - but so far he's failed to convince that that innings wasn't a one-off.

Denly Named In Champions Trophy Squad

Joe Denly is the only new face in England's 15 man Champions Trophy squad, and a welcome inclusion. Andrew Strauss will lead the team, who will take on the Australians in seven ODIs before heading to the tournament in South Africa next month. KP misses out through injury, and Mascarenhas has been dropped.

Collingwood keeps the captaincy - in the absence of Strauss - for the forthcoming T20 internationals against Australia, and Denly and Test new-boy Trott have been included.

Only one new face puts paid to the significant changes I was hoping for, and I'd love to have seen Michael Lumb make the cut, but Bresnan, Rashid and Morgan are largely untried at this level, so hopefully they'll get a chance to impress. Overall, there is potential for fielding a relatively new-look team, which, given the lack of consistency of the current side and the relatively unimportant nature of the Champions trophy, is what I hope the management go with.

ODI series v Australia and Champions Trophy

Strauss (capt)

Anderson

Bopara

Bresnan

Broad

Collingwood

Denly

Flintoff

Morgan

Prior

Rashid

Shah

Sidebottom

Swann

Wright

T20 Squad v Australia

Same, minus Strauss and plus Trott.

The Langer Dossier

Here it is in full, and here's some reaction to selected highlights:

On England: "English players rarely believe in themselves. Many of them will stare a lot but this is very shallow... They will retreat very quickly."

Traditionally it is hard to argue with this assessment, but it must be remembered that, 2005 aside, Langer played in a number of extremely one-sided Ashes series, including some of England's darkest days in the 90s. Also, he will have encountered much mediocrity since his association with county cricket began in the early 90s. I would also argue that things began to change on this front in around 2004, when the performances of Flintoff, Harmison and KP adopted something of a swagger and Fletcher's England began to gell in a serious way. With the nucleus of that team now disbanded, they could currently be building their second significant team of the decade. The reason for my optimism? The character of the newcomers - Broad, Swann and Bopara. Quality-wise, it remains to be seen how far they can go, but in terms of temperament I believe they compare favourably with their predecessors, and could end up banishing Langer's assertion once and for all.

On James Anderson: "He is swing [sic] the ball well but again can be a bit of a pussy if he is worn down."

I think he's describing Jimmy Anderson mark 1 here. His second coming, since coaches have stopped mucking around with his action, has seen him turn from a promising but confused youngster into one of the world's best swing bowlers, and one worthy of leading the attack. The maturity of his performances in the Caribbean confirmed his new status, even if the stats don't always. There's still room for him to improve on flat pitches, but his rate of improvement suggests he will.

On Ravi Bopara: "He is a bit of a street fighter who is sure to wind the boys up by his strutting around... I would leave him alone and just bowl at him rather than letting our egos take away our focus."

Langer is actually complementary about Ravi in the email, calling him a "good player". Obviously the Australians have got to him with the ball this series, but I actually think Langer's comments are positive - he clearly sees something in Bopara if he's worried the Aussies could lose focus by concentrating too much on trying to out-psyche him.

On Matt Prior: "I would chip away at him about his wicketkeeping... I am not sure he actually likes keeping that much and from all accounts he has a massive ego."

Well, whether they have done that or not is irrelevant - for me Prior has been the individual success story of the series for England. Langer's referring to how close Prior came to giving up the gloves and concentrating on an international future with the bat alone, and he's right in that there was a massive question-mark concerning his keeping even directly prior to the Cardiff Test. But, he's been brilliant with the gloves and as good as ever with the bat.

Also, on the ego issue, surely that's no bad thing? It's something he levels at Swann, Prior and Ravi (presumably it's too obvious with KP) but seems to contradict his ideas about English players' lack of belief. I'd take big egos any day - a swagger and a few choice words are exactly what we need to compete with the likes of Australia, and if that turns out being one of Pietersen's many legacies, then that's no bad thing.

England Reeling...

Well, we've had the rub of the green up until now, but today has been an almost comically tragic catalogue of catastrophes, starting at 4:50 this morning:

• The England players are woken by their hotel fire alarm, forcing them onto the early morning streets of Leeds.
• Flintoff ruled out of Test at 9:00am.
• At 10:00 am Matt Prior experiences back spasms while warming up playing football, and looks a major doubt at one stage.
• England elect to bat. This is not a criticism - it was a positive and brave decision - but Tuffers called it on TMS when claiming it's "a good toss to lose".
• 2.22 pm - England all out for 102, in 33.5 overs.
• Australia end the day on 196-4. England bowl badly and Anderson is clearly struggling with fitness.

Ouch.

Sydney Morning Herald Welcomes Trott

Here's the amusingly over-the-top Australian reaction to the possible inclusion of Jonathan Trott in tomorrow's Test team. They don't seem happy about it.

Trott is, to all intents and purposes, South African, and I can't say that fact sits easily with me. But it's never bothered me about KP, who, after all does have genuine English pedigree through his mother and was forced in that direction by the ridiculous system he encountered in South Africa.

But the journalist is way off the mark in trying to pass off Matt Prior and Andrew Strauss as South African. Both were born there, but Strauss moved to England aged six, and Prior aged 11. They received the vast majority of their cricketing education on these shores, not to mention the shaping of their personal development.

As well as having some problem with Flower being a foreign coach - which is neither disallowed nor a new thing for England - the other names mentioned in the article are possible future internationals Craig Kieswetter and Ryan McLaren. The McLaren case underlines the problem with Kolpaks - he was forced to withdraw from a South African ODI squad last year. I'm not sure what the latest is, but I haven't heard him linked with England recently. It's fair to say there are English born and bred players above him in the pecking order.

21-year-old Kieswetter is Matt Prior's natural successor, and is destined to be some player. But England can claim an element of credit for that; having grown up in South Africa he was sent to Millfield School, in Somerset.

It's nice of the SMH to take such an interest in our affairs, but the message conveyed in this article - that in England there's a massive dearth of home-grown talent and a national team full of foreigners - is simply not true.

Decisions, decisions...

Given the way Flintoff's fitness waned badly at Edgbaston, and having just seen Sky images of him bowling today in the Headingley nets, I don't rate his chances of being fit for tomorrow. This is a huge game and will quite possibly decide the series - full five-day fitness is clearly key. Even Flintoff is not worth a risk, and the selectors must remember that despite his Edgbaston batting heroics, he's mainly there for his bowling. I don't think he'll be as big a miss as KP, though it does pose problems in terms of balance.

There was a time - not long ago - when an often injured Flintoff's absence actually improved the balance of the England team. Right now, given his recntly improved batting, Broad's emergence and Prior's form at six, that is not the case. There are a number of possible combinations involving the three squad extras; Harmison, Sidebottom and Trott.

I would keep the changes to a minimum and swap him for one of the bowlers. Sure, that weakens the batting, but our lower order is not that of years gone by, and Swann, Broad and co can cope with a one place promotion. I'd pick Sidebottom given that he's a fine exponent of our greatest weapon against these Aussies. That deprives England of a hit-the-deck bowler, but as long as the Headingley pitch lives up to its swing-receptive reputation, I don't see that as a problem. Except that according to Matthew Hoggard, that's a big if. Still, Sidebottom has the local knowledge and has never let England down. The same cannot be said of Harmison.

Broad must keep his place, and not just because he strengthens a weakened batting line-up. He's a quality bowler and better than he's shown at times this series. He's learning all the time and is commendably unafraid to take the fight to the Aussies. He could do with a bit more guidance as to what his specific role is within this bowling attack.

I would also continue with Bopara and Bell, although two failures here by Ravi should open the door for Trott at the Oval. There, big scores and batting time on a good pitch are likely to be the order of the day - especially if the score is still 1-0 - and if Bopara still hasn't played an innings of substance since early summer by then, then Trott should come in, because he undoubtedly has.

England will decide on Flintoff in the morning.

Preliminary ICC Champions Trophy Squad Announced

England announced a 30-strong squad for the 2009 ICC Champions Trophy, yesterday. The tournament will be staged in South Africa in September and the squad will be halved by August 23.

England's ODI form in recent years has been extremely frustrating - not least because it has at times - 2007 home series v India, 2008 home series v South Africa - been excellent. However, for each of these results there is also the whitewashes of the 2008 winter series v India or the 2006 summer series v Sri Lanka.

So, results suggest that England are not a million miles away from finding a successful ODI formula, but the current one is not good enough; one or two steps forward, followed by the same number back. They have to try something a bit new. Although the selectors have named only one uncapped player (Hampshire's Michael Lumb), the squad includes a number of fresh, young and inexperienced names. Their inclusion could provide the subtle change in direction which leads to that illusive consistency.

This is the perfect tournament in which players can shed the label of potential in favour of the far more useful tags, experienced and good enough. It's not a World Cup, and I would suggest that signs of significant improvement (an obvious and suitable gameplan, clearly defined roles within the team, picking the right players and evidence of tournament-savvy play) is more important than returning with the trophy. The logic behind that being that should England happen upon some consistency, they may one day return home with a coveted World Cup.

That means making tough calls - dispensing with good servants of the county game who have served England passably in the past - Rob Key and Gareth Batty - and even those who have an obvious Test future but have failed to grasp countless ODI opportunities - Ian Bell and, in my opinion, Andrew Strauss.

Here's my squad. The main difference between this XV and the one which will be chosen is the absence here of the captain, Strauss. For me, his inclusion is indicative of the two steps forward, two steps back policy - he's shown at times (as recently as the Caribbean tour) that he's capable in the format, but struggled badly with its concept at other times, thus, as an opener, hampering the whole team. I would certainly keep him in the selection mix, but for this tournament would give the captaincy to Stuart Broad - eighth in all-time England ODI wicket-takers list and highly-rated as a thinking cricketer by Michael Vaughan.

My XV:

James Anderson (Lancashire)

Ravi Bopara (Essex)
Stuart Broad (Nottinghamshire)
Paul Collingwood (Durham)
Joe Denly (Kent)
Andrew Flintoff (Lancashire)
Michael Lumb (Hampshire)
Dimitri Mascarenhas (Hampshire)
Eoin Morgan (Middlesex)
Graham Onions (Durham)
Kevin Pietersen (Hampshire)
Matt Prior (Sussex)
Adil Rashid (Yorkshire)
Graeme Swann (Nottinghamshire)

Luke Wright (Sussex)

First Test, Day Two, Morning Session

England eventually all out for 435.

99 added to overnight score, and at quite a rate. 66 runs flowed from the first nine overs of the day, 16 off one Hauritz over which included three successive fours from Swann. Swann and Anderson made their 50 partnership from 38 balls. One day stuff.

England's perceived weakness - their lower-middle order - has got them into this match. The batting during the first few hours of yesterday's play was cagey and nervy. Apart from Bopara, the approach was conservative. Yesterday evening and this morning was anything but. Memories of the first day of the 2005 Edgbaston Test were evoked by Prior, Flintoff, Broad, Swann and even Anderson - who all batted with fluency and aggression in taking the fight to the Aussies. It was particularly good to see Flintoff batting naturally and positively. With a clear head, free of niggling doubts about technique, he is capable of scoring a number of 50s in this series.

Psychologically this morning's tail wag and Swann's targeting of Hauritz has put England in a strong position. Also, the pitch is turning more than yesterday. It will be fascinating to see how Australia approach their innings.

First Test, Day One: Australia Edge It. Just.

England won the toss and finished on 336-7.

Morning Session (belonged to): Australia

Afternoon Session: England

Evening Session: Australia

No big scores yesterday, but all batsmen (other than Cook) at least made starts. England finished the morning session on 93-3, having looked a bit shaky - no doubt a combination of poor recent Ashes displays, playing the Aussies on reputation and big match nerves.

I think the key partnership of the day was Prior and Flintoff's. Collingwood and Pietersen rescued the team in taking them from 90-3 to 228-4, but the bulk of those runs were scored in ones and twos with Hauritz and Clarke bowling in tandem to defensive fields - not particularly threatening. Prior and Flintoff, on the other hand, were the first batsmen to make batting look relatively easy. They were fluent and aggressive and the main reason England's run rate for the day reached an almost 2005-esque 3.73 runs an over. Their innings mirrored Pietersen's contribution to the Lord's Test of 2005, when he was the only batsman to offer any resistance and take the fight to the Aussies. His teammates caught up belatedly in the next Test - they wont want to leave it as late this time.

Talk of the day inevitably centered around Pietersen's dismissal - caught sweeping a very wide off-stump delivery from Hauritz. I nearly always defend Pietersen in such circumstances - buying into the 'but that's the way he plays' theory. However, as Hawkeye shows, there is no excuse for not pulling out of a stroke when a ball is that wide. Replays showed just how off balance he was in attempting the shot, which ultimately denied him the chance of getting a big hundred.

England can make yesterday a success by reaching 400 today.

Mike Atherton's take on Day 1

England Confident

The Ashes begin tomorrow and England are confident of rekindling the spirit of 05, and avoiding the humiliation of 06-07. The team will be announced tomorrow, the only deliberation being whether to include Panesar or Onions at number 11. The team will be:

Strauss

Cook

Bopara

Pietersen

Collingwood

Prior

Flintoff

Broad

Swann

Anderson

Onions/Panesar

It will be fascinating to see who Strauss goes with for the final bowling spot. The common consensus is that the pitch will turn, though not as much as originally reported, and offer a little in terms of pace and bounce to the quicks. I think Strauss will go for two spinners - he and Flower have had that plan in mind for months and today Strauss told the press that an extra spinner "allows you more control and gives you more options". It would be a brave move, especially given Panesar's form, but I believe it's a gamble that could give England a major advantage. Australia are now likely to play one spinner, but before the injury to Lee were widely expected to field an all pace attack. 

It is currently raining in Cardiff, but the forecast for the next few days is good.

You can have any other tournament you want but to have the chance to play in the Ashes is everything

Andrew Flintoff

England V India: Analysis

A thrilling game and a brilliant win. Here's what went well, and what needs attention:

  

  Where the game was won:

• The bowling - Hard to score off, good pace and bounce.
• Team selection - Sidebottom inclusion paid off.
• Flexible batting order - In theory, the move to bring Mascarenhas in at four was a good one. He's struggling to find the middle of the bat at the moment and India bowled well to him - meaning he finished with a sub-100 strike-rate - but England needed the momentum then, and that time in the middle may prove beneficial next time.
• Pietersen - Seems to have realised that he barely needs to alter his natural game in T20. When he plays well, so do England.
• Foster's stumping of Yuvraj - Justified his inclusion in one match-turning moment. Doubtful any other England 'keeper would have managed it.
• Fielding and catching - Flawless, save for one Stuart Broad missed stumping.
• Bowling plans and field placings - Didn't allow the Indian batsmen to play their natural game. Driving was off the menu, instead they had to resort to easily miss-timed pulls and cuts.
• Collingwood juggled his bowlers well - Maligned skipper got everything right in the field.

  Where the game was nearly lost:

• Batting - Inability to push on when Bopara and Pietersen departed. Not enough maximums again. Tempering Foster's brilliant stumping is the fact that Matt Prior coming in at five or six would be a very welcome sight.

A fine display, though defeat today would render it meaningless.

Read Jonathan Agnew's reaction