AT the last Trent Bridge Test, almost a year ago, Adam and Ben Hollioake became the first brothers for 40 years to represent England. The campaign to promote them, as the only counter to Australia's advance, had been so feverish as to be irresistible. Today they are due to represent Surrey at Cheltenham.

It is in the nature of newspapers, of course, to cast the leading personae of the day as heroes or demons, as black or white: headlines which convey a truthful shade of grey do not sell. Even so, the Hollioake campaign went exceptionally far over the top of reasonable expectation.

After the elder Hollioake had hit the winning runs in all three Texaco victories over Australia last May, ITV's Teletext asked viewers to respond to their poll: ``Is Adam the new Beefy?'' By the time of the fifth Test at Trent Bridge he was not merely the best all-rounder since Ian Botham but the best since - well, since Adam.

By then it was also time for Big Ben to strike in England's Test side. Big, handsome Ben, and pictured without his shirt on. Hollioake? Holy Smoke! When their parents flew in for the opening day at Trent Bridge (another photo-opportunity - hold that page), the brothers were all set up as England's two new messiahs.

In the event, like most messiahs, they have yet to fulfil their promises, or rather the promises made by their followers on their behalf. The Hollioakes are not as good as they were made out to be then. On the other hand they are also not as bad as they are made out to be now.

They also deserve to be treated as separate identities, though both will be named in the provisional World Cup party of 30 to be announced soon. Ben, at 20, remains all promise, apart from the two hundreds he made in the 'A' Tests against Sri Lanka last winter. In the championship he has still to make a century, or reach 1,000 runs in all, or 50 wickets. It is a measure of his talent that he did not look out of place when he was selected so prematurely for Trent Bridge.

This season, clouded by accusations of misconduct in Sri Lanka, Ben has had trouble with his groin and confidence. England's No 7 position, created by making Alec Stewart keep wicket, was designed for the younger Hollioake, but he has had to watch Mark Ealham and Andrew Flintoff fill it; and until he uses his leading arm to make his bowling more consistently accurate, he may have to continue watching.

Adam may be a less talented cricketer but he is a more substantial one, not least because he is six years older. He led England 'A' exceptionally well in Australia. In the championship he is the most successful county captain around, with 15 wins in his 31 matches in charge of Surrey. He did not deserve to retain the captaincy of England's one-day team for the forthcoming triangular tournament after persisting in his same Sharjah game-plan through six defeats in his last eight internationals, but he remains its best No 6 all-rounder.

His very business as a captain, however, at so young an age, has told against the rest of his cricket. He is a batsman made not born: in his two seasons in the 1st XI of St George's, Weybridge, he did not make a hundred. Since then he has improved enough to average more than 40 in first-class cricket, albeit half the time at the Oval, and in his Test debut innings of 45 he shared a century stand with Graham Thorpe, one of only five for England in the whole series.

Whether Adam will ever improve further to become a regular Test batsman must be doubtful. After all, of the 68 current county cricketers who have represented England, only 11 have reached 2,000 Test runs or 100 Test dismissals as bowler or wicketkeeper, and another nine 1,000 runs or 50 wickets. Expectation of England Test debutants has to bear in mind that only a small proportion make the grade, whereas almost half of Australia's make it.

But England may need Adam as their one-day captain again soon. Behind the scenes at the moment a tug-of-war is taking place. Like all other Test countries, the ECB have agreed to send a one-day team, their best available team, to the ICC knockout in Bangladesh in late October. Fair enough. The tournament has been dreamed up to raise money for the 'globalization' of cricket, something which England and Australia neglected when they dominated ICC.

England, though, are simultaneously committed to their Ashes tour, as ICC knew when they planned their knockout. And England have to field their probable Test team against Western Australia at the end of October if they are to give themselves their best chance, if not of winning, as that would be too much to ask, then at least of avoiding another Ashes humiliation which is the last thing English cricket needs.

It will be nonsensical if late October sees most of England's Test players stuck on the baked mud of Dhaka, when they should be acclimatising to the unique bounce of the WACA, where England dropped 10 chances on their last visit and where the second Test is to be staged straight after the first.

The players would then be left with only two games before the opening Test, one of them in Cairns, a new first-class venue for England but one which has been known to receive a tropical downpour. If Adam Hollioake does not take England's best available one-day party to Bangladesh, consisting of the Ealhams and Flemings and the reserve members of the Ashes party, we will all know who runs the asylum.

England's possible provisional World Cup party.

Batsmen: N V Knight, A Brown, M A Atherton, N Hussain, G A Hick, G P Thorpe, C J Adams, M R Ramprakash.

All-rounders: A J Hollioake, B C Hollioake, M A Ealham, M V Fleming, R C Irani, D R Brown, A Flintoff, P J Franks.

Pace bowlers: D G Cork, D Gough, A R C Fraser, M P Bicknell, A R Caddick, A P Cowan, M C Ilott, C E W Silverwood.

Spin bowlers: R D B Croft, A F Giles, I D K Salisbury.

Wicketkeepers: A J Stewart, P A Nixon, R J Turner.