Why do England persist in picking Tim Bresnan?

We're beginning to wonder at the Reverse Sweep if Tim Bresnan has got something on Andy Flower, Geoff Miller or Andrew Strauss (or maybe even all three?), as however badly he performs in England's one day side he keeps on getting picked.

Whilst we admire Bresnan's wholehearted effort and useful runs down the order, he is as much an international class bowler as Wayne Rooney is a monogamous husband. Strauss has persisted in giving Bresnan the new ball this summer despite a paucity of wickets and a flood of runs. As the stats below show, Bresnan has had a truly awful summer of one day cricket for England:

Tim Bresnan - ODI bowling figures
	Mat	Overs	Mdns	Runs	Wkts	BBI	Ave	Econ	SR
Career	30	239.5	11	1271	32	4/28	39.71	5.29	44.9
2010 summer	9	76	3	429	7	2/40	61.28	5.64	65.1

An average of 61.28? Only seven wickets in nine matches and just look at that economy rate. Bresnan is a World Cup accident waiting to happen and it is inconceivable that Ajmal Shahzad, who has looked pretty handy on his limited international appearances to date, hasn't been given further opportunities.

So just what does Bresnan have on the three amigos running the England team? Answers on a postcard please.

Comments

[Cricket Burble]

The numbers don't look pretty - agreed. Shahzad has got a bit of work to do on his fielding though - he was a bit of an embarrasment in that area when he played, and he's a lesser batsman.

There's been a few times when Bresnan either seems to have no plan or seems to be bowling to a plan he doesn't agree with....that's key to him improving. His batting is also quality for 8. Until there is someone obviously better than him - taking into account all 3 areas - I'd play him but sort out his bowling plans and not feel that he has to bowl 10 overs every time. England have Bopara and Collingwood to bowl a few overs as necessary.

[Cricket Burble]

And if we do need to change it, Sidebottom is the man, not Shahzad!