Unlikely Looking Lad

For all the usual reasons - too much going in the day job, and in life itself - I didn't manage to mark the retirement of Stephen Harmison when it happened. But this is no bad thing. Sometimes it is a good idea to let the sound, the fury and the dust settle.

And sometimes, pace Sachin Tendulkar, it can be worth waiting until the player actually retires.

After surviving the initial barrage from Betts, I could see from the corner of my eye a tall, lanky lad with an innocent, baby face and long hair swinging his arms, jogging on the spot and jumping up and down like a monkey in the zoo. Obviously warming up to bowl the next over, I thought nothing of it until I glanced at Boony who was still grinning like a circus clown. As he walked past me at the end of the over, he winked at me as if to remind me of his early promise, or threat.

I wasn't to be disappointed. Unleashed was Stephen Harmison, a six-foot-three, nineteen-year-old from Northumberland in the north-east of England. Luckily, I was standing at the non-striker's end when this unlikely looking lad ambled in, jumped high at the crease and, from over seven feet in the air, delivered a bouncer which thudded into the gloves of his keeper. To everyone's surprise, except Boony's, the ball hit the gloves before any of us could blink. Boony's grin glistened as my eyes widened at the prospect of battling this youngster, whose baby face had quickly turned into that of a fierce-eyed monster. His first ball wasn't a fluke, as the next six overs produced some of the fastest bowling I have faced in a long time. This boy was quick, and I mean really quick. Like a West Indian fast bowler, he bounces in, hits the crease hard and hits the pitch harder.

Justin Langer 'From Outback to Outfield', 1999.

Steve Harmison could always bowl fast. He may not have known how, or why, but he knew that he could. Bowling for Durham at Justin Langer's Middlesex side at Lord's in June 1998, he liked the way he could make good players feel a sense of discomfort, liked the way he could make the ball bounce steeply, liked the way the ball took the edge of the bat before nestling in Martin Speight's gloves. This was an uncomplicated time. Just get it down there and see where it takes you.

Where it took him was the England team.

All teams have their eras. Times that, when those who followed them get older and move on, they view with fondness and the warm, embracing glow of nostalgia. For all their more prosaic and predictable recent successes, for England the days between their arrival in the West Indies in early 2004 and the death of the dream at Sydney in early 2007 were that time.

And from that time the mind's eye's memory scroll reveals many things. England in the field, with Vaughan, sunhatted and animated, cajoling and controlling with an indefinable and irreplaceable air of authority. Flintoff, muscular and unsophisticated, pounding in, shaking the ground and the batsman's hands with his leaden weight of delivery. Trescothick, restrained, often seemingly inert at slip, catching everything. And Harmison, windmilling in, knees and elbows pumping, sweat dripping, a Bob Willis for the Internet age.

Fletcher on the balcony, seeing everything, revealing nothing.

The apogee of this period - perhaps of modern Test cricket - was the Ashes series of 2005. As time has passed, the series and its quality has been praised and revisited so many times that it has entered the realms of cliché. This was England's time. Cricket's time.

It wasn't really Harmison's. With the recent departures from the first-class game of Matthew Hoggard and Simon Jones there has been much justifiable praise for the four-man seam attack which brought the Ashes back from seemingly permanent exile. Harmison's figures of 17 wickets at 32 both encapsulate the nature of his career of peaks and troughs and reflect the fact that, in the summer when Flintoff and Jones were kings, Harmison played a more fractured part. But this was his way, and, at the times in that year when he got it right, he really got it right.

10.30 on the first morning of the series, Thursday 21st July 2005. I am sitting in a packed Warner Stand as Harmison, with the Lord's pavilion behind him, begins his run. The sense is of gathering power and speed, like a fully-laden jet airliner devouring a runway. Unlike Brett Lee, who will do the same later in the day, there is little sense of athleticism or beauty, but there is rhythm and there is high, high pace.

Langer, seven long years on from his first enervating encounter with Harmison, takes one on the elbow, second ball. Later in the morning Ponting too is marked on the cheek. Blood is spilt. Years later, everyone remembers these things.

But for Harmison there are also wickets. Five in just 68 deliveries as Australia, for so long seemingly impregnable, succumb for 190 by mid-afternoon. In this Harmison's importance to his team is confirmed. When the muse is with him he can provide pace, he can provide bounce and he can provide match-defining advantage. He has done this against the West Indies, sure, but he has now done it to Australia, who, even as the cracks begin to show, are a much tougher proposition. England end up losing the match, but there are hints that they can compete. The standard has been set.

Sixteen days on and it is late on an Edgbaston Saturday. England have stood toe-to-toe with Australia but there is a sense that the match is entering a crucial phase as Warne, with naked aggression and self-belief, and Clarke, with astute accumulation, chip away at a difficult target. 175 for 7 chasing 282 for a 2-0 lead in the series which will probably prove decisive.

Clarke is still young here, with his future of back trouble, back-biting and batting greatness lying ahead. He has watched from the non-striker's end as Martyn, Katich, Gilchrist and Gillespie have fallen, but he has played with patience and skill. He has started to feel a little more comfortable at the crease and he, we, have a sense that the bowlers are starting to tire as the close approaches. Harmison, bowling the day's final over, musters a renewed effort. The knees are still high, the sweat drips from his pores in the steamy sunlight of the Birmingham evening, and the arm comes over high for the fifth time in the over, with one no-ball called. Harmison has been bowling at or around 90 miles per hour but this time he decides to throttle back and bowl the most perfectly-timed slower ball any England fast bowler has ever delivered. Clarke, in and set, is nearly up to the challenge. Normally a batsman plays early at a slower ball but Clarke sees it for what it is. However, recognition is one thing, combatting it very much another. Clarke knows what is coming but his timing is shot to pieces and he plays too late. Unfortunately for him the ball is straight and his middle stump is gone. The ground erupts, as does the England team and millions watching at home. Tomorrow, somehow, they will win.

This was the most brilliant thing that Steve Harmison ever did in an England shirt. The years afterwards always carried a sense of unfulfilment, with performances like the destruction of Pakistan at Old Trafford in 2006 immediately followed by a caning at the hands of the self-same batsmen at Leeds, and the individual and collective humiliations which the Australian summer of 2006-7 brought. But for all his inconsistencies and his ingenuousness, on those days when everything clicked - as much in his mind as in his body, Steve Harmison could bowl, really bowl.

The last memory anyone has of him in his national colours sees him hurtling in from the pavilion end at The Oval, Australia sliding to defeat, and a hat-trick beckoning.

The hat-trick doesn't come but a few balls later, the Ashes are won back again.

Harmison, at thirty, is finished with Test cricket.

Jekyll and Hyde

As the fallout from England's first winter selection begins to gather, I thought this, by Mike Selvey, was a typically thoughtful appreciation of Harmison, whose career at Test level now looks dead and gone.

Selvey may be partially right in that England may end up missing Harmison in South Africa more than they now expect, but what they'll miss will be more the wistfully-recalled Harmy of blessed memory (Kingston, 2004) than the arrhythmic, Jekyll and Hyde trundler of too many recent encounters.

Elsewhere, I can't disagree too much with the selection of Steve Davies, but that of Luke Wright and the bypassing of Joe Denly look dubious.

If there's one thing Alastair Cook needs now it's not promotion (to the ODI squad) but competition.

Back in Contention

If your first-class career is still in its early stages and you're averaging nearly 70, scoring just 7 and 8 in a match must pull you up a bit short. All in all, it's unlikely that Phil Hughes's double failure at Worcester will have a serious effect on his confidence, but the manner of both his dismissals - caught close in dealing poorly with short balls - is sure to cause some interest among England's bowlers and some concern in the Australian camp.

The bowler who delivered both those balls, Steve Harmison, is another man in an interesting position. After a distinctly average winter it was assumed in some quarters that England's future lay without him, and this may still be the case. But with what he's done at Worcester you wouldn't be at all surprised to see his name at least in contention for a place in Wednesday's side, although, as Harmison himself has said, if England do play two spinners it's hard to see how he'll fit into the team.

Others, such as Graham Onions, would offer more consistency but less pace and hostility, but Harmison has laid a powerful marker down over the last few days at Worcester.

The trouble, as ever, is that no-one can be sure how he's going to bowl on any given day, but that might just be a risk worth taking.

Pear Shaped

Overall, the England selectors haven't come up with a bad series of selections ahead of the Ashes. There was no logical way to select Vaughan (so it's slightly surprising that they didn't), and, as I thought, Onions is a bit ahead of Harmison, although Ashington's finest has an opportunity to state his case at Worcester next week.

However, no announcement of this type is complete without a little bit of madness, and this time it came in the shape of Vikram Solanki. Someone obviously had the idea that the Lions side had to have at least three Worcestershire players in it to give the locals an incentive to turn up (and if that's true what does it say about the parochialism of county supporters?), and, while Steven Davies and Stephen Moore probably deserve to be there, does Solanki?

A decent, occasionally handsome, batsman, who's in good form. But someone whose unfulfilled ODI career is behind him and who is never, surely, going to play Test cricket. If they felt they really had to have another Worcestershire player then Moeen Ali would have been a better choice.

The only real point to Solanki's selection would seem to be to make Owais Shah aware - if he wasn't already - that his own short Test career is a thing of the past.

Suspension of Doubt

With the World T20 grabbing the headlines it's been easy to overlook the fact that the County Championship has been jogging along in the background for the last couple of weeks.

Durham are top, and both Steve Harmison and Graham Onions have been in the wickets. Patrick, at Line and Length, reflects on some of the questions which their successes pose.

I'm not sure that I agree with Patrick about Harmison being 'too soft' (although he really should be wary of saying things like that with the media around). However, doubts about the clarity of his mentality will never be far from the surface when an England team is about to be chosen and the doubts are perhaps stacked a little higher than the hopes these days.

Onions is the coming man, having bowled well against the inept West Indians, but, more importantly, having carried on taking wickets since. I have a feeling that he's probably a little ahead of Harmison in the running just now.

Elsewhere, while it seems perverse to invoke the example of a Twenty20 tournament when selecting a Test team, the fact that Adil Rashid generally showed up well, coupled with the fact that Panesar continues to struggle for his county, means that the Yorkshireman is surely the front-runner to partner Graeme Swann if England do decide to play two spinners in Cardiff.

Striking Fear

For me, the highlight of the D'Oliveira Trophy series was Graeme Smith's epic at Edgbaston, while I also really enjoyed the contributions of Prince, de Villiers and Amla. South Africa were worthy winners and will surely provide us with some rich entertainment when they take on Australia over six home and away Tests later in the year.

For England, despite a well-constructed win at The Oval, the prognosis is more dubious. Strauss's place once again appears vulnerable, while Ambrose's has surely been lost. Monty - stereotyped, apparently going backwards (from the lowest of low bases) with the bat and in the field and vitally lacking competition - is becoming a concern. As, of course, is Ian Bell. The evidence of the last three matches was that I and a few other observers (not to mention Bell himself) were wrong in thinking that his Lord's 199 meant that he'd finally cracked Test cricket. Much of Bell's batting after Lord's hinted at a man who'd sunk straight back into the complacency which often seems to hover just below the surface of a unit which - notwithstanding Collingwood's ultimate renaissance - still seems a bit too cosy.

Two final parting thoughts:

1. It's clear (as if it wasn't before to most people apart from Duncan Fletcher) that Steve Harmison just needs to bowl and bowl and bowl. It's anyone's guess what'll happen abroad during the winter but, for next summer, just let him bowl as much for Durham as he needs to (if there's any space between the Tests). You know it makes sense (and so, hopefully, does he).

2. For the first time in my cricket-watching life (thirty-plus years and counting) England have a specialist batsman capable of striking fear into any side in the world at any time. David Gower was a genius, albeit of a more fragile cast than KP, but he never quite seemed to have Pietersen's extra determination, self-certainty, improvisational flair and sheer balls.

Christ he's good.

Bizarre

I'm not a huge fan of Jonathan Agnew; he's obviously a nice bloke, loves his cricket, but he's often a bit bland for my liking and sounds as though he's auditioning for a part as the new 'Johnners'. However, it was good to hear him coming down strongly against the selection of Darren Pattinson when I walked in this evening, as I agreed with every word. Where his critique really hit the nail on the head was in his focus on what the selection would say to the range of English bowlers who could, indeed should, have been picked ahead of him.

It was a bizarre decision on a number of levels. Consider this:

a. To all intents and purposes he's Australian.

b. Before today he'd played in eleven first class matches and is almost thirty years old.

c. He'd only ever bowled at Headingley once. In a Twenty20 game.

d. His captain had only seen him bowl once. In a Twenty20 game.

e. Regardless of his ability - and the stats speak of a decent bowler with some promise although probably a bit old to ever fulfil it - it was asking a huge amount for him to take his place in a side in which he'd never met or even played against most of his team-mates, on a ground he didn't know, and produce his best form.

A penny for the thoughts tonight of Steve Harmison, Matthew Hoggard, Simon Jones and Chris Tremlett.

Calling The Shots (Badly)

I was chatting to my mate Alan over breakfast in Worcester last weekend and we decided that Steve Harmison's Test career was probably over. We also still had our doubts about Jimmy Anderson, and I favoured a return to Matthew Hoggard.

Since then Harmison's taken a hat-trick and a six-for, and Anderson...well, you know what he's been up to.

On this basis I'd like to predict the demise of both Ian Bell and Paul Collingwood, in the certain knowledge that they'll both hold their places in the side for the first Test against South Africa and then cream the Proteas all over Lord's.

You never know...

Harmison and Hoggard: The Future

Well, in the end, the football injury didn't amount to much and Anderson managed to get through the last day and a bit without any trouble, although he was apparently rattling around the pitch as a result of the number of painkillers he was taking. It didn't matter too much, as Sidebottom and Broad did most of what was necessary and England were worthy winners, moving on to Napier as favourites to win the series.

The news of the day in some quarters seems to be the fact that Moores has pointed out that it'll be hard for Harmison and Hoggard to reclaim their lost places. Stating the obvious, I would have thought, as long as Broad and Sidebottom keep bowling well, although history shows that there's at least as much chance of a vacancy occurring because of injury as loss of form.

Obviously both Harmison and Hoggard will need to be bowling well to put themselves in the frame for a recall, but, if they do, will the selectors want them?

Hoggard: A probable yes, on account of his ability to bring similar qualities 'to the party' (as Duncan Fletcher would have said) as Sidebottom; swing, control, competitiveness, heart.

Harmison: Very possibly a no, based on what's becoming too long a history of technical inconsistency and temperamental vulnerability.

With Hoggard you just know he'll be busting a gut to get back in. With Harmy you can't help but have your doubts. And, if he's not sure how much he wants it, you can be sure that the selectors won't be sure how much they want him.

The Axe Falls

I've just woken up to discover that Steve Harmison and Matthew Hoggard have been dropped by England for the second Test against New Zealand in Wellington. In Harmison's case it was expected, but I'm surprised about Hoggard. He bowled poorly in Hamilton but he was among England's better bowlers in Sri Lanka before Christmas and has been hampered more by injury over the last year than poor form.

With the dropping of Jonny Wilkinson from the England rugby union team for the first time since 1999 yesterday there's the obvious feeling of eras ending.

This may or may not be true; at this point in time I'll be surprised if Hoggard isn't back in the side and bowling well before long, but I'm much less sure about Wilkinson and Harmison.

Time will tell.

A Mess

In an interview on Radio Five Live here in Britain the other day Geoff Boycott was asked whether England were simply an under-prepared side or a genuinely poor one.

He opted for the former, but, with another heavy defeat under their belt, I'm far from sure that the latter isn't the case.

New Zealand must be given full credit for their win; they played throughout with a togetherness, intensity and clarity of purpose which England never matched and their relatively unheralded seam bowlers, Kyle Mills and Chris Martin, drove a stake through England's hearts on the final day.

But, with the exception of their catching, England currently look a mess. Strauss is back in the side for no apparent reason and with no apparent form; Pietersen seems to have retreated into a self-imposed shell within which he finds a range of ways of getting out; the occupant of the wicket-keeping position remains uncertain. Turning to the bowlers, with the exception of Sidebottom and Panesar, they look unprepared, as they seem to do for almost every tour they go on. This is particularly true of Harmison, whose range of mental frailties don't help, but Matthew Hoggard, normally so reliable, looked thoroughly under-cooked in Hamilton.

It's deeply depressing to see England, so vibrant and successful between 2003 and 2005, sliding back towards the bad old days, but, with every series defeat, that's what they're doing.

And, until they start being given proper preparation at the beginning of tours and until one or two people start to realise that they need to both respect their opponents properly and strike a balance between circumspection and forthrightness, that's what they'll continue to do.

A Slow Game and a Revelation

I'd spent the last few days thinking that I really ought to write something about the Hamilton Test this morning, but not really knowing what, other than that it's been, by modern standards, a very slow game, partly due to the pitch and partly because of England's first innings caution.

Having listened to some of the 'action' overnight before it got interesting, I was shocked but pleased to wake up this morning to find that Ryan Sidebottom had taken a hat-trick and that England had worked their way back into some sort of contention thanks to him, Panesar and some excellent catching from Cook (again), Strauss and Hoggard. I find it hard to believe that they'll be able to get very near the total they'll need on the last day, but at least they've got a chance.

With most of England's other seamers - especially Harmison - suffering, once again, through lack of preparation, Sidebottom confirmed what a revelation he's been since he returned to the side last spring. Good fitness, a consistent line, plenty of ticker and both conventional and reverse swing as and when required.

A few years ago I raised my eyebrows when I saw that Mark Ramprakash had named Sidebottom as one of his most difficult bowling opponents. Ryan Sidebottom? That bloke with all the hair who'd played one Test years ago?

Now I can see what Ramps meant.

The Day's News

In New Zealand England are stuttering through their one and only proper warm-up match for the Test series, and, in Bangladesh, Graeme Smith and Neil McKenzie are really putting Bangladesh to the sword. In all probability Roy and Mankad's age-old record will fall early tomorrow.

There's every chance that England will, in what is now the traditional manner, enter the Test series under-cooked, with a keeper making his Test debut. However, it's encouraging that Steve Harmison is finding the cut strip with regularity and it was good to hear Kevin Pietersen declare this morning that he was only interested in playing for England and all the money in the world wouldn't tempt him away to the IPL.

I believe him. For the time being.

Crashing Down

Touring Sri Lanka is tough, and England have been holding themselves together - often by the skin of their teeth - since Kandy. Today, though, it all came crashing down and there appears little hope of salvage over the next two days unless there's a hell of a lot of rain.

The England bowling attack, apart from Harmison, has looked insipid, although Hoggard is probably short of maximum fitness and Sidebottom has continually been let down by fielders in general, and Prior in particular. The batsmen can make fifties but can't go on to big hundreds in the way that is second nature to Jayawardene and Sangakkara. The fielding is shoddy; all the side's best specialist close fielders - Trescothick, Strauss, Flintoff - have gone from the team and we're left with the ageing (and never reliable) Vaughan, the coltish and mystifyingly poor Cook, and, of course, Prior.

When this game is wrapped up it's back home for Christmas and then off to New Zealand, by which time a few more players might find themselves out of the team.

Treading Water

After a couple of days of tracking down the Colombo close scores in the internet cafes of New York City I returned home to see the second Test played to its ultimately rather dreary conclusion. Peter Moores sounded optimistic this morning - it's one of his strong points - but, although England were good value for their draw in the end, they look to me like a team that's treading water. Enough batsmen are in form but the hundreds (with Bell, as usual, especially culpable) won't come, and the bowling attack is solid but lacks penetration. If they can get Hoggard back for Galle it will help, and, with the wicket expected to take spin, Graeme Swann's name may be discussed. You also have to wonder about the selection of Bopara when he's doing hardly any bowling.

So, for Galle it has to be a won toss, hundreds from any two of Cook, Vaughan and Bell, and some penetrative spells from Harmison, Hoggard and Panesar.

Should be easy...

Bopara and Shah

I haven't been posting much recently, for which apologies. Something to do with spending time rearranging my house, standing on a freezing touchline watching thirty public schoolboys attempt - and largely fail - to play rugby and toasting the past cricket season over several pints of Otter and some food with some mates from my club.

During the past few days, when I've been in, I've had the first India-Pakistan Test on, but never managed to watch much of it, which meant that I was left with a pretty sketchy idea of what went on. It was good to see Munaf back, even if he didn't pull up any trees, and there was penetration with ball and bat from Kumble, Laxman, Ganguly and Jaffer. India looked worthy winners of a tight contest, which augurs well for the rest of the rubber.

England, meanwhile, continue an uneasy build-up to their first Test in Sri Lanka, with the most interesting sub-plot for me being the contest between Owais Shah and Ravi Bopara for the final batting place. While seeing the merits of both, I always felt that Bopara was likely to nudge in front because of his youth and ability to bowl (if not his 'bowling ability'). Having scored 47 to Shah's 26 today and taken two wickets with the new ball after Harmison and Anderson went lame, you have to feel that the deal is all but done, however high Moores' regard for Shah.

Ravi seems sure to be there, but who (apart from Hoggard and Broad, the most nailed-on debutant for years) will do the rest of the bowling?

Lord's Thoughts

I'm off to London for the Test in the morning, so there's not much time to produce any very profound thoughts about the game.

However, taking into account the benign nature of recent Lord's pitches, I'd expect the side winning the toss to bat first, although England could be tempted to bowl given the relative fragility of the Indian top order.

There's talk about the possibility of Dinesh Karthik getting the gloves for India, which would be a pity from my point of view as I'd like to see Dhoni play for the first time. It'd be nice to see Yuvraj as well, though, and it could be a case of one or the other.

England are certain to be without Steve Harmison for the whole series and it looks likely that Stuart Broad will make his debut. I hope so.

I also hope that the weather doesn't ruin the game, but there's a better than even chance that it will.

See you next week.

Winners (and Winners)

There were a number of winners at Old Trafford: England, who finally wrapped up a series they always seemed destined to win, Monty Panesar, who took six more wickets on the way to his first ten-wicket Test match, and Steve Harmison who finally, finally, seemed to be getting back to somewhere near his best. The balls which put paid to Taylor and Edwards were fresh out of his heyday, circa 2004.

But the biggest winner of all, in my opinion, was Chanderpaul. His typically resolute and utterly magnificent century didn't secure victory (do they ever?) but he showed again why he's fit, despite all the illusory rough edges, to be spoken of in the same breath as his nation's greatest batsmen.

He's his own man, though. Not the power of Lloyd, Kanhai or Kallicharran - just heaps of rough-hewn Guyanese technique leavened with timing, dedication and courage.

With Lara gone for good and Sarwan out he's carrying the weight of the side on his tiny shoulders and he's doing it well.

The West Indies lost but the way they came back in the second innings seemed like a victory of sorts, however tiny and irrelevant.

Maybe there's hope.

Talking Heads

It's been a while since I've posted, largely because I've been away at the Lord's Test for most of the last week. I'll try to make up for it over the next few days.

As most of the talking heads in the media have been saying, the West Indies will have taken more from the outcome of the first Test than England. The tourists went into the game with hardly any practice behind them and ultimately made a fair fist of competing at Lord's, although they were helped by England's bowling, which, with the exception of Panesar, was wayward and insipid. They can take a lot, though, from the defensive certainty, in both innings, of Daren Ganga, and the more exciting lower-order contributions of Dwayne Bravo and Denesh Ramdin which enabled them to avoid the follow-on. The bowlers still need work, and they'll surely get it at Headingley.

England's batting was consistently excellent, with the only discordant notes struck by the twin failures of Strauss (whose place must be in doubt if both Flintoff and Vaughan return) and Owais Shah (who's already gone, but is hopefully not forgotten). However, I was extremely dubious about the tactic of batting Shah at three. Bell did relatively well there in Australia, and, even though the place seems to have been ear-marked for Vaughan it would surely have been better to keep Bell there and give Shah the chance to bat under less pressure at six. As it was Shah looked nervous and hesitant and so may not have done much better at six, but we'll never know.

Cook was Cook, Collingwood was Collingwood, Bell was Bell and Pietersen was Pietersen. Matt Prior, however, was outstanding, and his powerful hundred against a tired attack and tidy keeping may indicate that England have finally found a worthy successor to Alec Stewart. I hadn't seen him play live before and I was hugely impressed. My old favourite Steven Davies might have to wait a bit longer but that's no bad thing.

England's bowling was poor. Monty did all that could have been expected in largely unhelpful conditions with the assistance of Asad Rauf, but Plunkett was a random mixture of the very good and the very bad, while Harmison was just bad, looking once again like a bowler devoid of form, desire or confidence. It was instructive that he had taken some good wickets at a low average for Durham, though, so perhaps he's just developed a mental block about Test cricket, which would explain a lot.

At the moment Harmison's form represents Peter Moores' biggest challenge. It's one he needs to meet - perhaps by appointing a new bowling coach - as soon as possible.

Predictability

The England squad for the first Test against the West Indies, announced earlier this morning by David Graveney, was quite predictable, even though it contained a couple of players who I'm sure wouldn't have been there if Duncan Fletcher had still been in charge.

As I wrote a few weeks ago, I always had a feeling that Matthew Prior would secure the wicket-keeper's spot ahead of Paul Nixon, chiefly because of his past links with Peter Moores. In a sense it's hard on Nixon, who did everything that could have been asked of him (and more) during his short time in the side, but, at 36, he was never going to be there for very long. Of course, there are no guarantees that Prior will do any better than any of the other glovemen who've been tried over the last four years but he probably deserves a go, if only on account of his first-class career batting average which nudges a heady forty. I've seen very little of him - and nothing live - so I'll be interested to see how he goes at Lord's.

As a break with the past it's also good to see Owais Shah in the squad, although he'll only play if Pietersen isn't fit. While his stilted ODI career has been a largely hesitant affair, both with the bat and especially in the field, he's always been a potential Test player of quality, something which he fully demonstrated in Mumbai last year. It's nice to know that Moores recognises his quality in a way that I don't believe Fletcher did.

Liam Plunkett takes the fourth seamer's position ahead of Anderson and Mahmood, which will do for the time being. Mahmood in particular looks like someone who could do with playing a bit more county cricket (perhaps a whole career's worth) and there are still doubts over Anderson. However, Plunkett himslef needs to start producing his best with a bit more regularity if he's to prevent the selectors looking towards Broad and Onions.

I'll be at Lord's for the game and if the weather allows enough play I expect an England win well inside five days. The West Indies will be lacking practice against the red ball (they're not goung to get any play at Taunton today as it's pouring down) and they usually seem to lack motivation these days. Harmison and Hoggard are both bowling well and England also have plenty of batsmen in form.