Why England should play six batsmen

I’m not English and don’t follow English cricket that closely, but I can use a computer and the internet and read things called statistics, and I can’t help wonder how on earth England settled on their current batting line-up.

Maybe there are factors I’m unaware of – if there are, I’d love to hear them, especially from any keen followers of the English domestic scene who happen to read this – but from this distance it seems England’s selectors have really bent over backwards to help Australia win the Ashes this summer.

Let’s take the last Test. England’s batting line up was:

1. Alastair Cook
2. Mark Stoneman
3. James Vince
4. Joe Root
5. Dawid Malan
6. Moeen Ali
7. Jonny Bairstow
8. Chris Woakes
9. Craig Overton
10. Stuart Broad
11. James Anderson

I think most cricket followers acknowledge the skill of Cook and Root. They average 45 and 53 at Test level. Cook is clearly not what he was, but he’s still done better over the past few years than anyone else England have tried.

I also think few would quibble with Bairstow as a keeper batsman. He averages 39 at Test level, which is very nice – though it’s less than his first-class average of 46.

(AAP Image/Dave Hunt)

Broad and Anderson aren’t really expected to bat now even though Broad went through that weird period where people insisted he was an all-rounder. Some Aussies are trying to do the same thing with Pat Cummins now.

I like Ali and Woakes as bits and pieces all-rounders. Ali averages 34 with the bat and 40 with the ball at less than three wickets a Test, but he was nicely counterbalanced at eight by Ben Stokes at six. Stokes averages 35 with the bat, 33 with the ball at less than three wickets a game.

Woakes at nine meant a strong lower-middle order – he averages 29 with the bat, down from 35 at first-class level, and 31 with the ball, up from 25 domestically, at less than three wickets a game.

But Stokes isn’t in the side and England didn’t replace him with a like-for-like player; they added another bowler. Craig Overton averages 22 with the bat and 26 with the ball at first-class level. They’ve swapped a player who averages 35 with one who averages 22 – and before Overton they picked Jake Ball, who is a genuine tail-ender.

I don’t know why they didn’t replace Stokes with Samit Patel (FCA of 37 with the bat and 38 with the ball) or Adil Rashid (FCA of 33 with the bat and 35 with the ball).

Actually, yes, I do – it’s because they’re both spinners and everyone knows you need pace to win in Australia. Just like those pace-dominated English attacks of 2006-07 and 2013-14 which helped England lose five-nil.

Anyway they’ve replaced Stokes with a specialist bowler, so they’ve weakened the batting there.

(AAP Image/Darren England)

Adding to the pain are Stoneman, Vince and Malan. These players did okay in the first Test, so there was some high-fiving at their selection among the English, but a cursory look at their records indicates that they are not giants of the domestic scene.

I’ll go off first stats because they’re all still relatively green at Test level – Malan is 30 years old and averages 37.34, Stoneman is 30 and averages 35, and Vince is 26, averages 38. Those aren’t great numbers. England’s top six features four batsmen who average less than 40 at first-class level.

Maybe they were the only options, then? Let’s look at who wasn’t picked on this English side and their first class stats:

• Liam Livingstone: 24 years old, averages 48.75 with the bat (only 31 first class games admittedly) and can bowl a little too;
• Rory Burns: 27 years old, averages 42.17 with the bat after 92 games;
• James Hildreth: 33 years old, averages 43.32 after 234 games;
• Dan Lawrence: only 20 years old, averages 42.89 after 40 games; and
• Ben Duckett: 23 years old, averages 41.77 and has played four Tests.

In the tour squad there’s also Balance, who averages 48 at first-class level and 37 in Tests but who no-one seems to think is any good at Test level; and back-up keeper Foakes, who averages 41.84 at first-class level.

Maybe you can forgive an opener who averages under 40, but not middle order batsmen – not when other options are available, and I’d love to know why Malan and Vince got the nod ahead of them. Better catchers? Better team men? I have this awful feeling the answer is ‘prettier stroke-makers’, but I could be wrong.

Foakes and Balance are in the squad but don’t seem to be in the running for Test selection. Lawrence, Burns, Duckett and Livingstone are in Australia with the Lions team; I don’t know why they’re not with the actual team.

(Ryan Pierse/Getty Images)

What to do for the third Test, though?

First, England need to rectify the Stokes situation – there is no like-for-like replacement, not with Rashid and Patel in England. England’s batting is fatefully weak.

So faced with that I would play six batsmen and Ali at eight. Ali’s not a great specialist spinner, but he’s still better than the squad’s back-up spin option, Mason Crane, who has 75 first-class wickets from 29 games at 43.98. I don’t know why they took Crane instead of Jack Leach, who has 167 FC wickets at 26.

I’d drop a bowler for an extra batsman. I’d also get rid of Vince, whose batting practically screams ‘enigma who will always let you down’.

If bringing in Lions players is an impossibility – I don’t know why it would be, but I recognise there might be political considerations here – I’d go:

1. Cook
2. Stoneman
3. Root
4. Balance
5. Malan
6. Foakes
7. Bairstow
8. Ali
9. Woakes/Overton (take your pick of whoever you think will get more wickets)
10. Broad
11. Anderson

I know, I know – that’s only four bowlers. But England won the Ashes in 2010-11 with just four bowlers and got whitewashed in 2006-07 and 2013-14 with five bowlers – though they did play only four in the first Test in 2013. And, yes, Ali isn’t as good a spinner as Swann, but is weakening the batting line-up going to compensate for an extra bowler?

(Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)

That’s a side capable of putting on 500 runs and of putting Australian bowlers under real strain and causing Australian batsman to panic – which is, apart from the selection of Mitch Marsh, England’s best way of winning two Tests.

If they’re worried about Ali’s bowling, then play Jack Leach. If they’re worried about Foakes playing as a specialist batsman, pick Livingstone. If they’re worried about Cook’s form, pick Burns. All are in the country right now.

If Lions players were available, I would go for the following side

1. Cook
2. Stoneman
3. Burns
4. Root
5. Malan (over Lawrence because I don’t think too many players should debut in the one Test)
6. Livingstone
7. Bairstow
8. Ali/Leach
9. Woakes/Overton
10. Broad
11. Anderson

I know England are feeling down after 2-0, but they are still in with a chance of retaining the Ashes, especially if Australia pick Mitch Marsh at six – Australia had to be bailed out by their number six in the last two Tests, and now they might be picking their worst number six in history.

But they have to strengthen their batting first. They’ve chosen the squad poorly, but solutions are available.