England's top seven is formidable — five would make 2010-11 Ashes side

Times

12 hours ago

The question is simple: when did England last have a settled top seven in Test cricket? OK, maybe it is not that simple, because it assumes general recognition that they have a settled top seven now the storm demanding Jacob Bethell's inclusion has blown over — not necessarily the case, judging by some of the comments when I praised Zak Crawley at the end of the first Test.
That is, of course, because there is a very valid contention that England's top seven now is only settled because of some blind faith shown by the selectors in the likes of Crawley and Ollie Pope. But one man's blind faith can be another's clever and considered backing, and, like it nor not, England will be in the unusual position of going into this week's second Test against India at Edgbaston with not one of their top seven under any serious pressure. And that is unusual, because I always remember Andrew Strauss saying after his career-saving 177 in Napier in 2008 that the spotlight was always on someone and now, thankfully for him, it could move elsewhere.
What's more, this looks like England's Ashes seven for this winter. We do not know for certain whether this was the plan all along, because we do not really know how close Bethell came to displacing Pope or Crawley, but I suspect this was what the selectors wanted.
Bethell impressed last winter in New Zealand, has done so in white-ball internationals, and will now act as a more than capable back-up batsman, unless he is considered as a spin option instead of Shoaib Bashir. It was easy to get excited at the time after that New Zealand series (guilty!) and demand that Bethell play in the next Test, but smart selection is not emotive and reactionary, it is calm and considered, with the bigger picture and future as much in the frame as the present. And at least this regime prefers consistency to the revolving-door approach that bedevilled English cricket for too long.
And, because of injuries and so many other factors, it is actually very hard to keep a top seven together over a long period of time. Think of the great West Indian line-up of Gordon Greenidge, Desmond Haynes, Viv Richards, Richie Richardson, Carl Hooper, Gus Logie and Jeffrey Dujon, but they only played 17 Tests together. Likewise the Australian template of Matthew Hayden, Justin Langer, Ricky Ponting, Mark Waugh, Steve Waugh, Damien Martyn and Adam Gilchrist, who only had 13 Tests as a unit.
Which brings us back to the original question, of England's best ever. The simple answer is surely the top seven that helped win the Ashes down under in 2010-11: Strauss, Alastair Cook, Jonathan Trott, Kevin Pietersen, Paul Collingwood, Ian Bell and Matt Prior, all of whom averaged more than 40 in Test cricket. As Pietersen said in the brilliant film, The Edge: 'It was a case of, if Cook missed out, Strauss didn't. If those two missed out, Trotty definitely didn't. Then I came in and slapped a few, they called us the engine room and the engine room took over.' Or as Steven Finn said in the same film: 'You got through the top four and there were still three high-quality batsmen to come.'
But even that septet only played together on nine occasions, four on the South Africa tour of 2009-10 and then the five Ashes Tests, although James Anderson was nightwatchman in the fifth Test to confuse the perfect numbering. Bell had been absent the previous summer — Eoin Morgan went to Australia in possession of a place — and Collingwood retired after the final Test.
This modern-day unit have already played together seven times, and it would have been more but for injury to Crawley last summer — when the selectors made a rare mistake in miscasting Dan Lawrence as an opener — and then Jamie Smith's paternity leave last winter, with injury to Jordan Cox meaning Pope kept wicket and Bethell had his chance.
If only Warwickshire would give Bethell such a chance at No3. Instead their overseas player, Tom Latham, bats there and Bethell was down at five in his first County Championship match this season. But then the counter-argument is that he was away at the Indian Premier League early in the summer, when he could have been searching for a maiden first-class century.
In my encomium about Crawley and Ben Duckett at the conclusion of the Headingley Test, I raised the tentative suggestion that they might already be a better opening partnership than Cook and Strauss, because their average together is higher and their strike rate is significantly superior. Of course, Cook and Strauss were more reliable and more prolific over a much longer period of time, as their deserved knighthoods attest, but there is little doubt that Crawley and Duckett can do things they could not.
I still maintain that their opening stand of 188 in that final innings at Headingley was work done at a wondrously lofty plane, not least because it challenged the tradition of placing greatest importance on first-innings runs. As big chases become even bigger and more common, might we see a shift in perception? That seemed to me to be a partnership that delivered when the stakes were at their highest.
In truth the only reason this piece is being written is because of Crawley and Duckett and the alliance they began in 2022, ending years of vacillation and underachievement at the top of the order. Between Strauss retiring in 2012 and the start of this union, England, remarkably, used 22 players to open the batting, including Crawley and Duckett in previous lives, as well as the odd nightwatchman and pinch-hitter.
A settled top seven is impossible with that sort of hiring and firing, but while Australia dither about their batting order, with a particularly fragile top three in Sam Konstas, Usman Khawaja and Cameron Green, England now appear to have a clear plan. Yes, there is a long way still to go until November, and, yes, even if they make it, all seven will go to Australia with much to prove (Duckett, Harry Brook and Smith have not played Test cricket there and even Joe Root is still looking for that elusive hundred down under), but the signs are promising and, were I selecting a composite seven from 2010-11 and today, I might be inclined to select five of the present crop.
Root and Brook pick themselves, as numbers one and two in the world and with Test averages (50.92 and 58.04 respectively) above all those in 2010-11 (Pietersen was the best of them at 47.28). Ben Stokes has to be a shoo-in because of his all-round qualities, with the 2010-11 team lacking a genuine all-rounder after Andrew Flintoff's Test retirement in 2009.
Duckett would complement Cook nicely (sorry Straussy, but you two were quite similar!), and Root, despite his misgivings, would have to move up to three to accommodate Pietersen at four and Brook at five. Again that is harsh on Trott, although Pope only averages marginally less (43.63 to 45.72) in that position and has significantly outscored his opposite numbers in his Tests there, even if he did have a stinker in Australia last time in 2021-22, averaging only 11.16.
So, finally, Smith or Prior at seven with the gloves? Prior was a magnificent counterattacker in the Gilchrist mould, but Smith looks as if he can take that role to another level.
England in general took their batting to another level at Headingley. It promises to be some year.
My seven: Cook, Duckett, Root, Pietersen, Brook, Stokes and Smith.
Second Test, EdgbastonWednesday, 11amTV Sky Sports Main Event & Cricket
Do you agree with Steve James? Post your ideal England top-seven below