England analysis: A lust for sackings and the axe for Peter Moores will not end this shambles

England are in denial, but axing coach Peter Moores and rushing to give ex-captain Andrew Strauss director's job would be folly

Peter Moores, left, shakes hands with Jonathan Trott after England’s humiliating defeat by West Indies (Reuters)

If the runes are being read correctly, Peter Moores will soon be sacked as the England coach by someone who has not yet been appointed. And that someone, if it should prove to be the new, red-hot favourite for director of cricket, Andrew Strauss, is himself a woeful nominee according to many experienced pundits.

Such is the feeding frenzy around the team at present, after their lamentable defeat in the third Test against West Indies on Sunday, that there is yet again a lust for sackings, change, any which way. Alastair Cook, the captain, has slipped under the radar for now but he will move into view again soon.

England came here firmly expected to win this series. The people of the Caribbean could see nothing but defeat. England made worryingly hard work of it, but when they finally broke their opponents’ will on the last day of the second Test in Grenada, the game seemed to be up.

Instead, West Indies produced a gallant performance in the third, overcoming a first-innings deficit of 68, and eventually won at a canter by five wickets inside three days. England are left to contemplate their home season, with Test series against New Zealand and Australia, and if they are going to sleep dreaming about them, they will pretty soon wake up in a cold sweat.

Moores’ position is understandably vulnerable for two reasons. This is his second bash at the job and it is undeniable that England were expected to win the first of five series, embracing 17 Test matches, until the end of next January. The rest are decidedly tough and the toughest of all is against Australia, starting in July.

The evidence of the past few weeks, confirmed by what happened in Barbados, suggests England will be fortunate to take the quest for the Ashes beyond the fourth Test. Moores said England’s collapse – to 39 for 5 in the second innings and then to 123 all out – was produced by a combination of quality bowling, a tough pitch and the pressure of the situation. With respect, although the home side bowled well, it was nothing compared to what England will face this summer.

Strauss opened the England batting alongside Cook (Getty)

It is not the first time that England cricket finds itself in a mess. How they deal with it may help them to regroup but the whole issue is being confused by the new director of cricket.

An assumption has grown that this will be Strauss, the former captain, who wants the job. However, it is difficult to think that there has yet been a proper interview process. Tom Harrison, the ECB’s new chief executive who is undergoing a baptism of fire, has been in America.

The new chairman, Colin Graves, has been in Barbados. These are the two men who will have most influence on the appointment, and if they were to offer it to Strauss without closely examining other candidates they would deserve everything that might later happen.

It may be that Strauss is the prime candidate. He took over as England captain when the carnage was greater than it is now and won 24 of his 50 Test matches, including two Ashes series, home and away.

It has been suggested that Strauss would be too conservative, as sometimes he was as a captain, but nobody should underestimate his ruthless streak. Nobody should assume that he would keep Moores and Cook in situ just because they are jolly good blokes.

All that England must ensure, after all that has been written and said, is that they look at other people. Michael Vaughan was never about to make a formal application and those who thought he would do not know the man. Vaughan has a lot to offer English cricket beyond his present mischief-making from the sidelines but it will never be in an official role.

Vaughan has been correct about one facet of this England team, though. They are in denial, and that applies to Moores and everybody else.

The selection of Jonathan Trott was always a gamble. They should not have taken it despite Moores’ protestations that he fulfilled all the criteria for recall. All but one – there was not a place. Asking a previously traumatised batsman to open the batting, which he had done once for England in an emergency in India was reckless. Trott’s sad recall has done nothing for the science of sports psychology, as his retirement yesterday from international cricket only underlined.

There are many other fallibilities. It is not Moeen Ali’s fault that he is the best spin option, but as the front-line slow bowler he was found terribly wanting on the last day in Barbados. Looking at what happened here, if he performs the role against Australia he will be smashed into the stratosphere.

Similarly, England are trying to make a first-change seamer out of Chris Jordan. It is not going to work.

Yet the selectors offered Moores and Cook, who pick the XI, options in this series. None of Adam Lyth, Mark Wood and Adil Rashid was given an opportunity – but Lyth is a genuine opener who has scored loads of runs for the county champions, Yorkshire; Wood is quick and accurate; and, although everyone knows Rashid’s tendency to bowl bad balls, there seemed little point in having him here.

The Loughborough Academy, which is apparently not to be part of the new director’s brief, has signally failed to find a decent bowler. That alone is indicative of failure. Whether Moores or Cook go is important but England are a long way from where everyone expected them to be.

Heroes or zeroes? England’s tourists rated

Ratings by Stephen Brenkley

Alastair Cook (captain)

Batted pretty well, without being back to his best, and his long-awaited hundred was welcome. Responsible for selection, he was found to choose wrongly. 6/10

Moeen Ali Receded both as batsman and bowler. He was short of bowling, which showed; his batting is prone to casual errors, and as the only spinner he makes England brittle. 4

James Anderson Often the only threat, he broke a record and bowled beautifully. He has to stay fit and enthused, England have to risk making pitches for him – but he needs help. 8

Gary Ballance Sucked in with everybody else by the final Test but he is resilient and quietly determined. Australia will tell us much more about him. 7

Ian Bell After a glittering hundred in the opening Test he faded from view, out badly three times. It is crucial for England’s sake that he finds a consistent vein of form. 4

Stuart Broad Second-highest wicket-taker but far from the bowler he was and his batting is in tatters. If he cannot be restored by the Ashes, England are in deep trouble. 3

Jos Buttler Keeping is improving but his glaring missed stumping, which would have made West Indies 87 for 5 in Barbados, was a bad lapse. Plenty of potential, but expect blips. 5

Chris Jordan There were moments when he looked like a third seamer, but too many times when he did not. Magnificent slip fielder but running out of time to worry Aussies. 4

Joe Root What a future Root has before him and the selectors have to resist making him captain too soon. It is probably no such thing but he makes batting look so easy. 7

Ben Stokes They have to run with Stokes (as they should have last summer) but Test cricket is not the straightforward game he briefly made it look. Needs runs, needs wickets. 3

James Tredwell Played in first Test, bowled well without threatening to take second-innings wickets. Clearly not the answer to England’s problems. n/a

Jonathan Trott Poor Trott. His recall was a disaster, the degree of which was not apparent until the final Test. Out of position, he floundered. Bad judgement all round. 1