England changes for South Africa

There are some fascinating permutations in that squad, none of them looking absolutely convincing at the moment. I suggest that the key questions are:

Who is to be No 3?
If Stokes is not fit for the earlier Tests, what is the fallback plan?
In what circumstances would Patel, or Jordan play?

To some extent all of those questions are interdependent, because of the importance of a pace bowling genuine all-rounder to the make-up of the side in South Africa. If Stokes is not available to play then it is inconceivable that we would field three fast bowlers and two spin-bowling batsmen, but none of the other fast bowlers should ideally play above No 9 - unless as a group of 4 with a very strong batting line-up above them, and even then there would be a need for supernatural help in winning the toss.

Ballance didn't look to have corrected his trigger movement backwards when he made runs against Sussex in August, and that was on a pitch without a great deal of bounce. If he is to come back at 3 then his replacement for Bell makes no sense:it may be just a continuation of the same pressure placed on the middle order batsmen that 10-1 could become 20-2. Compton could come in at 3 with Hales opening and that might give some solidity, but I don't think the situation could easily be reversed if Hales didn't take his chance as opener. Another option might be for Root to move up to 3 with Taylor 4 and Ballance 5, giving the latter a better opportunity to display his skills.

The ideal team from this squad should have Stokes and, currently, Bairstow as 6 and 7, and it probably wouldn't make any difference which went in higher, but if there is to be no Stokes then however long the tail might look the balance of the side can't be improved by playing Samit Patel as well as Moeen Ali. With all the criticisms of the latter as opener, and the weaknesses of his bowling against the Pakistanis, Moeen does have the knack of taking wickets, if a little expensively, and with 4 pace bowlers operating he is always a good bet for an analysis of something like 10-1-40-2. Samit, on the other hand, is just as likely at Test level to give away the 40, and very unlikely to get any wickets.

As for CJ, with all his virtues he can't really be regarded as a batsman good enough for the top 7, and not really at No 8 against a strong bowling side. He is certainly slower than Foottitt, though faster than Woakes. Woakes has made runs in one day internationals and plenty in championship games, but I'm not sure he would be a strong replacement for Stokes as a batsman, and his bowling at this level is pretty much meat and drink to keen-eyed batsmen on bouncy wickets.

So, no definite answers there, but a lot of opportunity for some to genuinely establish themselves as players for the next few years -unlike the new generation that was rather laughably invoked last summer by a somewhat gung ho media circus.