Were England right to omit Michael Vaughan?
Yes. He didn't score any runs after he resigned the captaincy and has not played any cricket over the winter. Plus, England played reasonably well in India and it is important to keep faith in players when they perform.

Owais Shah was preferred to Vaughan. Is he likely to make the first XI?
I would be surprised. He didn't play in India even though he is strong against spin and has batted well in India before so, unless England are looking to the Ashes series and want to see how he handles pace, I can't see him being selected.

Ian Bell, the player who would be the most likely to make way for Shah, didn't perform well in India but he is a good player and has scored runs in the past. Having stuck with him so far, I cannot see England dropping him now.

Geoff Miller, the national selector, says Vaughan is still a strong contender to face Australia in the summer. Can you see him making it?
I'd be surprised. You have to take the national selector at his word but the players in possession of a place must be strong favourites to make the Ashes squad. Either Bell or Shah would have to have a shocker in the Caribbean for Vaughan to get selected.

How close is Adil Rashid to the first XI?
A lot closer than a lot of people suggest. I watched him in the nets in India and was very impressed. England have selected three spinners for the Tests against the West Indies and Rashid has a bright future, but he is probably ready for the side now.

Were England right to pick an almost unchanged one-day squad?
No. They were right to select Dimitri Mascharenas - he was unlucky not to be picked for India - but I would have been tempted to make further changes. The one-day side was outplayed in India; I didn't expect the selectors to keep faith with those players.