It's always the fringe selections that get people's goat. Just ask Mark Ramprakash. One minute he's in the one-day first XI. The next, he's not even in the best 16. Of the top six that zapped the Zims, England have dropped the one player who gets most messed up by being messed around. His replacement, Michael Vaughan, is a lucky man. What has Ramps done to deserve this latest snub? It certainly wasn't failure on the field. In Zimbabwe, where he played all five games, he started with three wickets and a 35 that took England to the brink of victory; he added 6* when a game was already won, and then an innovative 47, which contained some untypically adventurous blows over the top and ended only when he was run out by Paul Collingwood. He faded with scores of 17 and 6 but there was enough evidence to suggest that he was rising to the challenge of reinventing himself for pyjama cricket. His fielding was infallible too.

England may have felt that Vaughan (one-day international average: 7) is more tomorrow's man than Ramprakash, but then why was Ramprakash preferred to, say, Owais Shah for four out of five games in Zimbabwe? Consistency remains an elusive goal for England's selectors.

At least they have righted one wrong by refusing to axe Shah, whose Zimbabwe odyssey consisted of facing two deliveries. Being punished a third time (he was also ignored for the whole Ashes series) for an impressive one-day debut series in June would have been too much to take.

The rest of the squad suggests that England have decided that the time to experiment is over. The decision to leave out Chris Silverwood and Ryan Sidebottom reduces the number of Yorkshire bowlers in the squad to a mere three (Craig White, Darren Gough, Matthew Hoggard), which is what it should be. Out go Paul Grayson, who will never trouble better sides than Zimbabwe, and James Kirtley, who will surely return.

The recall of Andy Caddick and Gough gives the bowling a less green look, but it also raises a problem. Matthew Hoggard must play after combining penetration with parsimony against the Zims, but England can't include three rabbits in the same side. Gough is the first choice because he regularly takes wickets with the new white ball, and Hoggard could edge out Caddick for the same reason. What would you rather: Caddick's customary 10-2-37-1, or Hoggard's 10-0-47-3?

The allrounders present a similarly pleasant dilemma. Unless White takes the new ball, England will only be able to pick three of him, Collingwood, Andy Flintoff and Ben Hollioake. Assuming Collingwood is now inked in at No. 5, White and Flintoff would be better picks in India, where reverse-swing and extra pace come in handy; Hollioake would be more suited to the soggier wickets of New Zealand. Either way, the cupboard is well-stocked.

Just as encouragingly, exactly half of the 16-man squad is 26 or younger. England's one-day future looks brighter than it has for a long time.

Lawrence Booth is assistant editor of Wisden.com.

© Wisden CricInfo Ltd