england, where to from here?

Peter Moores - the new Duncan Fletcher.

In the aftermath of England's World Cup exit, David Graveney was accused of going into hiding.

The reality turns out to be far worse: he's turning up for work as usual.

This much was confirmed on Thursday when the chairman of selectors donned his three lions blazer and nylon slacks to announce a 25-man 'Performance Squad', the biggest waste of ECB toner since Chris Schofield's central contract.

The case for careful reflection and deliberation could not have been stronger.

England's players have not yet shaken off their jetlag following a World Cup shambles decades in the making, there has been only one round of domestic matches this season - and that mostly representing a kind of Seniors Tour for Pura Cup players - and the independent Schofield Report on the future of English cricket is not published for another couple of weeks.

Yet Graveney is chairman of selectors and, by thunder, he and his new best friend Peter Moores have selected.

The result is as coherent as one would expect of a building project with no blue prints.

A key priority of the Schofield Report, had Graveney and Moores waited for it, would surely have been establish distinct, coherent selection strategies for Tests and ODIs.

In other countries most top players play both forms of the game well but that isn't the case in England: the adage that good players will excel in any format has been exploded by Michael Vaughan, Ian Bell, Andrew Strauss, Matthew Hoggard and Steve Harmison.

Despite the torrid Ashes winter, a look around the world suggests that there is little grounds to question their status as the number two Test side and a relatively benign summer fixture list offers the chance to entrench that position.

Fine-tuning will suffice ahead of West Indies' visit to Lord's next month but bloody revolution is required for the ODIs with the Windies and India later in the summer.

In addition is the issue of timescale: there are two years to mould a Test team for the Ashes and four - or even eight - to mount a serious World Cup challenge from the ground up.

So why are the two grouped together?

From a Test point of view there are two problem positions, wicketkeeper and number eight, yet few viable long-term solutions to either on Graveney's list.

Paul Nixon appears in pole position for the former role but this would be an unforgivably backward step: there is no need for a short-term solution in a team which is basically sound.

Vaughan needs the best Test wicketkeeper for now and 2009, and the Leicestershire man is neither. England have won Tests in the past with James Foster and Chris Read, and will do so in the future with Steven Davies.

Any of the three could face Australia next time and Read in particular must regret not pursuing a career in recruitment consultancy or car park attendance after being leapfrogged by Matt Prior.

A former favourite of Moores at Sussex, Prior's wicketkeeping and batting have both been found wanting in internationals in the past and it is impossible to believe that he would be higher than fourth in the Test pecking order under any other coach.

That Michael Yardy is included too should only make us grateful that Moores has at least resisted the urge to pick Chris Adams, Mushtaq Ahmed and Ted Dexter.

Prior is equally surplus to ODI requirements as Nixon should initially retain his place: he has shown he knows how to win one-day matches and could prove an unlikely father figure in the early development of the 2011 WC team.

As for a Test number eight, only Stuart Broad in the current squad has the remotest hope of performing that role as required and he has much to do.

If he has now overtaken Saj Mahmood and Jimmy Anderson in the seamers' pecking order it is not because of his stellar development but because they have gone backwards on Graveney's watch.

The only other pressing question for Tests is a teasing top order conundrum: with Vaughan confirmed as captain there is a scramble for two places between Strauss, Bell, Marcus Trescothick and Paul Collingwood.

Strauss and Collingwood, in part because they are the captaincy options if Vaughan's knee gives way, would appear to be in possession with Bell paying the price for a poor World Cup.

Trescothick surely cannot return without confirmation that he is capable of touring again.

That he and Simon Jones retain central contracts with no viable Test wicketkeeper in the twenty-five tells you everything you need to know about Graveney's ability to distinguish between arse and elbow.

The Test team does not need a performance squad since, gloveman aside, it is clear who the strongest 18 or so players are.

The ODI team on the other hand lacks more than three performers, offering infinite scope in piecing together the next team but no case for naming "those in possession".

As former Academy director Moores ought to be best placed to make such calls but has instead confirmed his reputation as cricket's answer to Steve McClaren by including Yardy, Jon Lewis and their ilk: players suitable neither for imminent Tests nor 2011 ODIs.

At a time when he and Graveney ought to be wiping the slate clean they have established a reliance on the failed and discredited - not least the chairman himself.

By picking this squad and making his ally Vaughan captain for Lord's, Graveney has implicitly renewed his own contract for the rest of the summer.

Announcing this list ahead of the Schofield Report may have been a masterstroke after all.

Peter May