Were England right to leave out Andrew Flintoff?
MA: Yes. Though he bowled well for Lancashire against Sussex at Hove this week and got some runs in the second innings, he's still got to prove that his body can withstand the rigours of first-class cricket. Plus, the first two Tests run back to back, so it would ask a lot of him to play in both. Better for him to get through another game for Lancashire and come back for the second Test at Headingley. He would then be able to rest before the third Test.

So England should recall him regardless of how well they perform in the first Test match?
MA: I think so. You pick the best team in the circumstances and, if Flintoff proves his fitness, he is part of England's best XI. It may be cruel to players who contribute to a victory, but that's international sport.

Do you agree with the rest of the squad?
MA: Pretty much, though I would have been tempted to bring in Owais Shah for Ian Bell. Bell is good player and his recent double hundred for Warwickshire possibly secured his place, but I suspect Shah is very close to a call-up. Several of the batsmen who play at Lord's will know that, unless they improve on their form against New Zealand, they could lose their place to him.

England are likely to field the same side for the sixth consecutive match. Is there sufficient competition for places?
MA: There's a lot of competition among the bowlers. Of those players not in the squad, as well as Flintoff, Simon Jones is back and taking wickets, plus Matthew Hoggard, Graham Onions and, in particular, Steve Harmison are all in good form and pushing for a place. However, there's no competition for Monty Panesar, which is worrying, and only limited competition among the batsmen. After Shah, there's Ravi Bopara and Matt Prior, who can fill the role of a specialist batsman, but nobody else close to the Test side.

Explore Cricket

• Counties

• Live Scores