Jonathan Agnew: England should show a bit more flexibility

In terms of professionalism and preparation, I firmly believe that Andrew Strauss's unit sit at the top of the tree by some distance. Certainly in my 21 years of watching England, both home and away, I have never seen such a fit, disciplined and motivated team, and also a group of players who are constantly challenging themselves to improve.

And that element is crucial to their continued success. In some ways the ranking system is a bit of a red herring in that England could easily slip to second behind South Africa before they bowl another ball in anger next January.

It is a complicated set-up, not least because the 10 Test-playing nations are never all in action at the same time. But it is a guide as to how any particular team are performing at a given time, and also a motivating force.

Only through hard work and the hunger to set new standards will any team stay at the top for long and, although it has become something of a mantra, every time I interview any of the England players they will always couch their comments about their current success with a line or two about the need to keep improving.

Indeed, it happens so regularly that it must be a genuine reflection of the attitude in the dressing room and also of the influence and mindset of the coach Andy Flower.

It is impossible to judge this England team against another of a previous generation. The game has changed so much over the years that it is a pointless exercise to compare man for man with, say, Ray Illingworth's team of the early 1970s. But that said, I do believe that Strauss and Flower could learn something about the flexibility that was such a feature of cricket in that era.

Everyone knew that the pitch at The Oval would take spin and that it would do so early in the match. Strauss (right, with the Reliance ICC Test mace) said as much when he won the toss and chose to bat first despite the cloudy, humid conditions. Despite this, there did not seem to have been a single thought given to playing a second spinner.

They simply selected the same team as Edgbaston, with cover included in the squad for injuries.

You get the impression that the only way this team might change is through injuries, that Flower and Strauss would select the same XI every match if they could.

That's how this England team go about their cricket.

By contrast, there was far greater flexibility in Illingworth's time. There was no way his team would have played that balance of attack on that Oval pitch. The game was crying out for England to play two spinners and not the extra batsman, Ravi Bopara.

It is a strength to be able to shuffle your pack and introduce other elements to your side. They could have played Samit Patel at The Oval if they were worried about their batting, or they could have played Monty Panesar.

On that last day, options looked a bit limited and it was crying out for someone to spin the ball away from the right-handers. Graeme Swann is the best spinner in the world but is stronger against left-handed batsmen and Amit Mishra and Sachin Tendulkar played him well.

I really feel that a left-arm spinner would have presented them with far greater problems.
I am not nitpicking but this is the sort of thought England must introduce. They must learn to look at other formulas and consider different balances to their team. It will be fascinating to see who will play in their next Test against Pakistan in January in the UAE, where it is likely to be a very flat and slow pitch. I imagine they will play five bowlers.

If they do include two spinners during the winter, I believe they will go for the safe option of Patel because of his batting. But if they were going for an attacking selection, I would like to see them go with Panesar.

If England really are going to stay in the top one or two, they have to be able to pick different teams for different occasions.

The Oval was a good opportunity to show they can perform well with a different team. Let's just see a horse for a course now and then rather than just the same team.

England brought in Tim Bresnan for Steve Finn against Australia in Melbourne but they were just changing personnel, not the balance of their team. I would like to see them show confidence in what is a very strong batting line-up - Matt Prior is good enough to bat at No6 - and strengthen the bowling pack a bit.