Nice Post Mark. Nice to see someone else finding little real evidence for trescothick being on the verge of being dropped. People talk about the SA series as a failure for him, but I fail to see how 1 200, 3 50's and an average of 56 can be considered a failure by anyone! Good God, I'd love to go through that sort of slump in form!

As for Vaughan, I think we have to consider him our lead batsman. Even if his Big Summer was just a purple patch, I can't see any other ENG bastman capable of producing form like that even over a single summer. What is important is that he did that as opener, and so he's not only to be considered our lead batsman but also our lead opener. He's not been quite the same since he became captain, but we should bear in mind that he has been in harness for less than 12 months. We have to give him some time to let it bed in. He has a track record for hitting lots of runs:- he have to have faith that history will repeat itself.

The situation seems to me that ENG have a natural No. 3 (Butcher) and two openers who are proven performers in that position, but are going through an inconsistent patch. I strongly dislike the idea that the batting order should be rearranged every time a player loses touch, particulalrly when it might lead to others (eg. Butcher) being caused to play out of position as they are likely to lose thier own touch in the process. Its a tough call to open on debut. If Strauss comes in he should be allowed to come in in the middle order at least for a test or two. NZ have a good attack, and we should be wary of over-exposing him. So as I see it, the only batting change that is possible is to replace Hussain. I am against this - looking at career stats, Hussain is shown to be the most inconsistent batsmen in any major test team (median 20), but (witht he exception of Vaughan) hits 100's more often than any other ENG batsmen. Even more than Tresco, Nasser needs his dice to fall the right way. He is an appallingly bad starter. As I see it, Nasser has spent his entire career on the vrge of being dropped for the reasons Mark highlights for Trescothick. He should be careful whether we are dropping Hussain because "he is out of form", which I feel would be unjustified given his career history, or because we have a middle order that is collectively nearing retirement and we need to give some younger players a chance to gain some experience. If this is the case, I feel that we need to make the replacement without losing too much of what Hussain gives us. ENGs strength in the recent past has partially related to the fact that we no longer collapse quite so badly. The middle order is rather better known for its mental toughness, and ability to succeed in attritional situations than its ability to dominate the bowling. Strauss is a farily attacking opener. Pietersen is, in reality, a lower middle-order thunderbat. I can only see Collingwood being a natural replacement for Hussain. The question of Giles apart, the only replacement I can see is justified is Collingwood for Hussain, and then only if it is done for future good of the team.