CRICKET ASHES TEST SERIES: STEVE HARMISON, Ryan Sidebottom and the uncapped Jonathan Trott could all start the fourth Ashes Test at Headingley For strategic reasons alone, this is a match England cannot afford to lose.

After three Tests they have a 1-0 advantage, and that by their fingernails only. They might have won at Edgbaston last time out had the rain not disposed of around two days’ play but then again, such was the ease with which Australia batted second time around, they might not.

What is certain, though, is should England go into the final Test at The Oval still with that one-match advantage, then it is Australia who will have to make all the running in order to get the tied series needed to retain the Ashes.

Were Australia to win at Headingley, however, the onus would shift to England to force the win. Few teams go into a match with the sole intention of eking out a draw – West Indies in Trinidad were an exception – for that way can lie disaster. But there would be a world of difference in the possession or otherwise of the comfort blanket of perhaps being able to play the opposition out of the game without the need to force the issue. Andrew Strauss, of course, will pooh-pooh the whole concept and insist England can win the fourth Test.

Oh for a touch of that optimism, for this neck of the woods is more than a little nervy. Call it instinct or blind pessimism but the vision keeps appearing of England’s flaky batting imploding while Australia’s flourishes, and of Mitchell Johnson putting in a match-winning performance.

This could be put down to the ramblings of a depressive, were it not for the absence of Kevin Pietersen and the continuing slide of Andrew Flintoff towards the glue factory. It is a giant responsibility to have heaped on one the hopes of the nation, but that is precisely the situation facing Flintoff as he hauls himself towards a Test finale with a right knee like a pin-cushion. There is little point in putting any more lubricant into it because it would just spray out through the holes.

And so England waits until this morning to see whether Fred can do it one more time. In Birmingham he bowled with vigour, if not with the spark of Lord’s, but he hobbled along when batting as if he had had 10 years in the saddle, riding the range. His practice session yesterday provoked less than positive comment. All of which means he will probably turn up today, announce his fitness (whether Strauss and Andy Flower believe him), and barnstorm his way through the game. He is that sort of bloke.

However, the doubts surrounding him further complicate a situation that was already far from straightforward: England’s squad of 14 – which in addition to the Edgbaston XI includes two more pacemen, Ryan Sidebottom and Steve Harmison, and Jonathan Trott as an extra batsman – has been named not only to provide cover for Flintoff, but to offer alternatives in any case.

There is a case to be made for playing all three additions. Take the assumption Flintoff is fit. The reliance on Strauss at the top of the order is immense, as there has been little support further down. There is a straw-house feel to the upper order, with the lower ranks contributing a higher percentage than is healthy.

So, in this particular circumstance, do England need five bowlers and, more specifically, do they require a spinner? Graeme Swann has been a revelation and has taken valuable wickets, none more so than that of Ricky Ponting at Edgbaston. But following that he was disappointing. Beyond a holding role on a good pitch, spinners have played little part for England in recent times beyond a few tail-end wickets for Monty Panesar. This Headingley pitch is unusually dry, however.

Then we come to Stuart Broad, a bowler who has much to learn. He produced an excellent spell towards the end of the third Test. His runs were more than useful too. But he is not yet close to being as good a bowler as Sidebottom or Harmison. So a personal view, against England’s ethos, would be to play Trott at six, Matt Prior next, then Flintoff, followed by James Anderson, Harmison or Sidebottom, and Graham Onions.

If Flintoff is not fit then the priority has to be to replace his batting, and once more go for four bowlers (Harmison for Broad if Swann plays, Sidebottom as well if not). We can only hope the rumours of Prior at six and Broad at seven are just that.

Australia have selection issues of their own. All through the series they have looked a bowler light, a situation exacerbated by poor showings from Johnson and Peter Siddle. A rejig could see Stuart Clark and Brett Lee replace Siddle and Nathan Hauritz, although given he has had no competitive cricket since his injury, it would be a mighty risk with Lee. However, it would leave the batting intact. Alternatively, in order to include Hauritz, Mike Hussey could open instead of Shane Watson, with Michael Clarke (a slight doubt with a stomach strain) and Marcus North budging up to make room for the return of Brad Haddin. Johnson would come in at seven.

Both sides have more combinations than a Victorian washing line. Guardian Service