Does Trott's runfest further complicate England's number three woes?

Jonathan Trott was under some pressure when he came to the crease yesterday, so even if it was only Bangladesh it is to his credit that he proceeded to deliver a flawless batting performance to finish the day on 175 not out.
 
Vince Cable, the new Business Secretary in the UK coalition government, once famously remarked that former Prime Minister Gordon Brown had turned from Stalin into Mr Bean in a short space of time. Trott’s transformation was just as marked, having turned from a steely eyed Steve Waugh on his infamous test debut at the Oval to a rabbit caught in the headlights Mark Lathwell during the test series in South Africa.
 
Of course, Trott was elevated to the number three role for the tour to his homeland having scored that wonderful hundred against Australia from number five. Most observers felt that Trott, who doesn’t even bat at three for his county, was not a natural at first drop and one wonders if he is the best option for this pivotal position come Brisbane in November. However, it would seem that like Ravi Bopara against the West Indies last summer, Trott’s innings yesterday will earn him an extended run at number three all the way to the Ashes. England fans will hope that Trott will not emulate Bopara’s woeful performance against Australia last summer.

The number three position has long been a problem for England. All the other test playing nations with the exception of Bangladesh and New Zealand (who haven’t yet replaced Stephen Fleming) have a settled world class player to walk in at one down. Australia have Ricky Ponting, South Africa Hashim Amla, India Rahul Dravid, Sri Lanka Kumar Sangakkara, Pakistan Younis Khan (pending his appeal) and even the West Indies have Ramnaresh Sarwan. But England have not had a consistently successful number three for some years.
 
The last cricketer who provided longevity and consistency in the role was Mark Butcher. From 2001-05, Butcher played 44 tests with all but a handful being at number three, and averaged 41.01. Since then only Michael Vaughan during the Ashes of 2005 has had any real success at three; although Alastair Cook also performed the role with aplomb during the summer of 2006 before reverting to his usual opening position. The man who has batted at number three for most of the time since 2005 is Ian Bell and in over 30 innings he is yet to record a century.
 
A number of England fans (us included) would like to see Kevin Pietersen take on the challenge, but he has apparently been reluctant to do so. With the selectors loathe to giving Bell another run at three, Bopara having shown that he is more suited to five or six and Paul Collingwood also firmly established in the lower middle order, Trott has been given his chance. Whether that proves to be the right option in the long term, we shall see. But for now and even if the Bangladeshi bowling hardly presented much of a challenge, Trott is to be congratulated for coping with the initial pressure at the start of his innings to flourish and cement his place in the side for the foreseeable future.

Comments

[Mahek]

Hate to say this but I can't see how England can retain the Ashes unless Pietersen bats at 3.

[The Reverse Sweep]

Spot on Makek. KP has to be at three, but he doesn't want to bat there in test cricket apparantly