I have always felt that Nasser Hussain (along with Duncan Fletcher) till this day has never been given enough credit for what he did for England. People are all too ready to shove their heads up Michael Vaughan’s behind yet fail to recognise the work Hussain put in in dragging the English side off the floor and onto its feet before Vaughan arrived. Those that point to Vaughan’s Test record should know that a captain is only as good as his team. Had Hussain had half the players Vaughan had at his disposal, he would have done much better in my opinion.

Many Asian cricketers have manged to break into the English set-up but have not been given a fair chance and have been axed at the earliest opportunity, or have been ignored completely even when excelling in county cricket; the yard stick used by the ECB. Sajid Mahmood, Kabir Ali, Vikram Solanki, Mark Ramprakash and Owais Shah are just a few that come to mind. On the other hand, their lighter skinned colleagues always seem to get ample opportunity to play themselves back into form on the bigger stage when they’re struggling. You cannot, with an open mind, look at the names above and say I’m being paranoid. What other reason could it be?

The whole of the English batting line up in the ongoing Ashes has underperformed but the man to make way had to be Ravi Bopara. Ever since Shane Warne opened his mouth (I think it was his mouth), and said he would have selected Vaughan instead of Bopara for the Ashes, various folk have been on Bopara’s back. Over the last 12 Test innings, Bopara and Cook have an identical average yet Cook’s name has not even come close to being mentioned when talking about changes in the line up. Yes, Ravi has not made a 95 like Cook has this series but Cook did not get three centuries in a row in the two series preceding this did he? Also, Bopara hasn’t exactly been helped by Cook whose aversion to staying at the crease meant that Bopara was as good as playing like an opener on many occasions.

None of Bopara’s critics mentioned the blatantly wrong decision he received in his last innings, in which had he gotten a century, it would given the selectors something to consider….or maybe not.

Don’t get me wrong, some of Ravi’s play demonstrated technical flaws but rather than dropping him, it should have been a message to the powers that be that Ravi is not a number three. As soon as Pietersen got injured and Bell came in to replace him, they should have demoted Ravi to four and put Bell in at three, which strangely, they are doing now after bringing in Trott.

Geoff Miller, England’s Chief selector came on Sky Sports and said: “we have a consistent team selection and a consistent selection policy and we’ll stick by it”. Yes, I collapsed laughing. How is it consistent when you drop someone for the last and deciding Test of an Ashes series when he has played in all of the last four matches? That’s not consistent, that’s gambling.

It seems as if the Asian contingent have to work twice as hard to get in the side and then twice as hard to keep their places. As John Emburey once said when speaking of Owais Shah’s exclusion: “perhaps his face doesn’t fit”.