If England want to ruin Stuart Broad, it strikes me that they may be going the right way about it. Somebody tell me that he won’t bat at No 7 for the Test series in South Africa. Looking at the squad announced last week, it looks as if the selectors may be leaning that way, when it could be the worst thing to happen to the guy.

I’m not bagging Broad, because he has the makings of being a good player. He is a decent bowler and a reasonable batsman — just not an international all-rounder. By thinking that he is, England risk taking his focus away from what he is learning to do well: first and foremost to support frontline bowlers, then to chip in with runs.

The only time a team should go with five bowlers is when one of them is a genuine all-rounder. By that I mean a “Freddie” Flintoff, although he was more of a No 7 than a 6 in the order. If England don’t want to play Adil Rashid in South Africa, they have to go with Paul Collingwood at 6, Matt Prior at 7 and Broad at 8.

That line-up, with Graeme Swann at 9, has depth. Moving Broad and Swann up a place alters things dramatically. For Broad, there is a massive difference between having to score runs because that is what is expected from a No 7 and supporting the others or having a hit without too much responsibility a place lower. England should look at Shaun Pollock and Wasim Akram from the recent past. They had the potential to bat at No 7, but spent a lot of their careers at 8 because they recognised bowling as their more important skill. I would put Mitchell Johnson in that category — he can really hit a clean ball — and Broad as well.

Actually, I’m not too sure that Broad relishes the fast, short ball. He steps away to leg a little. I remember saying after the Ashes that if he is serious about becoming an all-rounder, he should try to bat at No 4 or 5 as often as he can for Nottinghamshire and play as a specialist in the County Championship. Broad seems pretty level-headed. My concern is with others getting carried away with his contribution in the Ashes. Let’s go back to the past couple of Tests. Yes, he produced that fantastic spell at the Brit Oval, and I give him every credit for that. It’s fair to imagine, though, that halfway through the previous game at Headingley Carnegie, the selectors would have been thinking about making a change. He couldn’t have been nailed on to keep his place.

Then he took a few wickets when Australia were well in front, crashed some runs when the game was lost and did enough to earn another chance. Even earlier in the series, it looked as though Andrew Strauss was reluctant to bowl him at times because he could not be sure of getting control. Like most 23-year-olds, Broad was up and down. For now, he should really concentrate on his bowling. The batting may come later.

Looking at the rest of the squad, it is disappointing that Stephen Harmison won’t be around. There aren’t too many of those fast, exciting bowlers in the world today. Believe me, he’s a horrible bloke to face and England will miss the option he could have given them in South Africa.

At the same time, I quite like Liam Plunkett. He always struck me as having something about him, but I wondered whether he knew the kind of bowler he wanted to become: out-and-out fast, or a medium-fast swinger with an effort ball. Perhaps he has found the answer after a couple more years of county cricket with Durham. I’m sure that will prove to be time well spent.

The Luke Wright selection looks strange. If he is going for experience then fine, because at 24 he is still young and might offer something down the track. At the moment he is a bits-and-pieces player who is not worth his place with either bat or ball. To move forward he needs to bat at No 5 and bowl first change regularly for Sussex.

Elementary as Watson issues bold statement

From what I saw of the Champions Trophy in South Africa, Australia were comfortably the best side and were deserved winners. To go through the event unbeaten without Michael Clarke, Brad Haddin and Nathan Bracken shows that there is depth in our one-day game. And perhaps now people in England will understand why we’ve always rated Shane Watson so highly.

As for England, they don’t have a single player to frighten the opposition unless Kevin Pietersen is fit. They might play well now and then — sometimes even for a couple of games in a row — but, overall, it looks to me as though it’s the same mistakes made by the same players who keep getting picked. They don’t strike me as a team going places.

What I don’t understand is why Hampshire, having won the Friends Provident Trophy this year, don’t have anyone in the latest squad and Sussex, who won the Twenty20 Cup and NatWest Pro40, have only Luke Wright and Matt Prior (who hardly played for them last season). Surely, there are guys in these teams doing something right and are worth a look.