A 5th bowler should bat at #6 or #7, probably #7 since keepers are all batsmen these days. If Bresnan got canned, then Yardy at #7 would be fine wouldn't it? (with Swann, Broad, Anderson, Sidebottom below) Especially if you are playing Collingwood and Bopara in the top 6 who would be solid backup bowlers.
And I'm sorry, but 'useful' often does cut it. All 11 players can't be stars, good teams often rely on guys like Hopes or Jadeja or van der Merwe or Styris - unspectacular guys who do a job...
Any player in the team needs to be making either regular and TELLING contributions, or have the ability to win matches. You can't just carry players like Yardy by theorising them into lower batting slots.
Emphasising I am now, and was at the beginning, talking 50 overs not T20, here's a rip to bits analysis of Yardy
Batting
Average : 17.88
Batting 3-5 : 3 inns, 8 runs @ 2.67
Batting 6-9 : 9 inns, 135 runs @ 27.00
His batting at 6-9 is bumped up by four not outs and is actually 15 runs per innings. In one dayers it's runs on the board that count, batting that low you're bound to be not out a few times and I don't agree with the system of calculating averages with players. For me your average should be runs per innings, that is a reflection of.................... how many runs per innings you score. Whether you are 50no or 50 and out, you still only scored 50 runs regardless whether being not out you
might have scored 300 or 3000
Bowling
Wkts : 11
Average : 40.18
BB : 3/24
Chips away but fails to take a wicket in HALF his ODIs. A player with a batting average of 17.88 and bowling average of 40.18 may be "useful" but why not employ somebody even MORE USEFUL who can average mid 30s or lower with ball, or average more with bat?!?!? Collingwood averages double what Yardy does with the bat, and 38.95 with ball. He's also picked up four wickets in an innings FOUR times, that's more wickets than Yardy's best haul and four times over. Take away Yardy's two three wicket hauls and that's FIVE wickets in THIRTEEN ODIs, or one every other.
You can argue he is underused, but that just reinforces my point. Might as well put in a frontline batsman or frontline bowler. England have gone through many theories in ODIs since reaching the 1992 World Cup final, switching between all specialists (bowlers/batsmen) to a collection of bits n pieces 'all-rounders' and frankly they've yet to get it right.
You've deliberately gone to the silly extreme of stating a team can't be 11 stars, I didn't say they had to be. I'm just saying that we need players who contribute more than Wright and Yardy. They don't bowl enough overs, don't bat often enough or contribute often enough when they do, so their purpose is like the overs format - limited.
And to reinforce my point(s) even further, in an ODI last year against Australia they not only contributed nothing, but we had players who could contribute more pushed right down the order.
ODI vs Australia (03/07/10, Lords)
Strauss
Kieswetter (wk)
YARDY : 5-0-19-0 & duck
Collingwood
Morgan
Pietersen
WRIGHT : 6-0-32-0 & 21
Bresnan
Swann
Broad
Anderson
So not only did the two in question contribute a mere 21 runs and 11-0-51-0 between them, the likes of Bresnan, Swann and Broad were pushed right down the order. We could have ditched both and brought in a batsman and bowler, the bowler probably batting below Broad and the batsman in at three. We'd have only needed to find one over from somewhere else, Collingwood bowled 1-0-4-0 so he could easily have done as little or more than Yardy and Wright did, a frontline bowler might have picked up a wicket or two and restricted the aussie total a bit and the batsman could have knocked off more runs than 21 to get us closer if not past the aussie total. Of course they might not, but if 21 runs and no wickets off 11 overs is your idea of 'useful' then I despair. We'll never win a World Cup or come close if we continue to carry 'useful' when 'useful' is not a great description of what they offer anyway.
Bresnan didn't bowl much better, but at least scored 34 runs. He's another I question the inclusion of. We do need some all-rounders in the side, but I reckon Swann, Broad and to a slightly lesser degree Collingwood cover some of that. If the keeper bats as well then we don't need rubbish like Wright and lesser Yardy, a handy bit-part bowler but his county career suggests he is not really a bowler other than in T20 when spin can be hard to get away
