England v West Indies: whitewash awaits tourists as England batsmen set to fill their boots It was a seminal moment for English cricket, as well as for the nascent tenure of coach Duncan Fletcher. "I often sit back and wonder what might have been if we had lost that Test," he said. Not much really; apart from England losing the series, Nasser Hussain probably resigning as captain (he had a woeful summer with the bat, and was actually injured for this Lord's Test), and the newly-introduced central contracts system almost certainly being panned. Fletcher might not have lasted too long either. Yes, taking the broad view, it was a rather important victory. As it also was in the rivalry between England and West Indies. A wall had been brought down; not yet to be rebuilt. In the 22 Tests since that day, England have lost just once to West Indies, winning 14 with seven draws. And even that loss, courtesy of a 51-all-out capitulation in Jamaica in 2009, did them much good. It was from there that the then-temporary coach Andy Flower took charge. There followed three draws on moribund pitches, but in Andrew Strauss and Flower England had found two steady hands on the tiller after becoming lost at sea in the horrible Kevin Pietersen/Peter Moores tempest. Now, sadly, there is little frisson about Thursday's first Test at Lord's, or indeed about the three-Test series. England play Test cricket in a different division from West Indies these days. It is not quite like the period between 1974 and 1990 when England could not win at all in 29 Tests, losing 20 of them in the famed "Blackwash" era, but the gap is still cavernous. Unless the weather intervenes significantly, England will win this series 3-0, even though West Indies have never lost in eight Tests at Trent Bridge, venue for the second Test. This England team like playing West Indies as much as the modern-day child does a Nintendo DS. It is said that the strength of this West Indies team lies in its bowling, and its attack does have some pace, but just check the England team's batting averages against this lot compared to their career averages. There will be little quaking in boots. Early-season county pitches may have been treacherously difficult for batsmen, but a Lord's Test pitch will be very different. Given the absurdly high water-table it will have movement, of course, but it will also have the benefit of a heavy roller once the match has begun- now an increasingly ridiculous prohibition in county cricket that must be lifted post -haste. Disentangled from the spinners" webs of last winter, England's batsmen will fancy runs. This might even be easier than county cricket, with the back-foot games of the likes of Strauss and Alastair Cook more suited to international cricket than dibbly-dobbly darts in the shires. Only Ian Bell's average against West Indies is lower than his overall mean, unsurprising given that he was dropped after that debacle in Jamaica in 2009. But even he made a century in his only appearance in a Lord's Test against them in 2007. Jonathan Trott has not played a Test against West Indies, but every other member of England's top seven has made a century at Lord's against them. Little wonder England have not lost against them at the ground since 1988. Ravi Bopara would have batted at No 6 in the recent Sri Lanka series had a side strain not prevented his bowling, and he could miss out again now with a thigh strain that might prevent his playing at all. Being unable to bowl would not have mattered in English conditions, but there could now be a tricky choice of replacement. The once-capped Michael Carberry is currently the best-equipped of the possibilities, and the exciting Jonny Bairstow has his advocates, but James Taylor's Lions" century on Friday, batting ahead of Samit Patel as he should do for Nottinghamshire, was as well-timed as one of his leg-side clips. Should he miss out, Bopara will be distraught, a man seemingly destined never to sustain a decent Test career. And all three of his Test centuries have come against West Indies, with a whopping average of 118.33, making 143 in 2009 in the last Lord's Test against West Indies. Then Bopara was at No 3. And in that match England fielded five specialist bowlers, including two debutants in Tim Bresnan and Graham Onions, alongside James Anderson, Stuart Broad and Graeme Swann. There are still some proposing that composition now, despite all the evidence to the contrary in recent times. England went to No 1 with four bowlers, why change now? Back then in 2009 they were early days in the Flower/Strauss regime. Strauss preferred five bowlers, Flower four. When Andrew Flintoff was fit for the start of the Ashes, it wasn't a problem. A genuine all-rounder balances a team like an accountant does books. But when Flintoff was injured for the fourth Test at Headingley, England went with Strauss's instinct and his five bowlers. They were smashed, and so since then have not opted for five bowlers, except in spinning conditions, and then only occasionally. As evidence of the frequent superfluity of five bowlers, Bresnan only bowled seven overs in that 2009 West Indies Lord's Test, which England won easily by 10 wickets. Swann opened the bowling in the first innings, preying on the left-handers, of whom there will probably be three in the top six again this week. Of course, Bresnan played in England's latest Test, the victory in Colombo, where he was preferred to Monty Panesar because of a combination of expected uneven bounce for the seamers and in-house reasons concerning Panesar that the England management quite rightly will not disclose. Bresnan is the lucky charm, with 11 wins in 11 Tests, but he, and Onions who will also be named in a 13-man squad, are likely to miss out to Steven Finn on Thursday. It will be a close call but Finn is the long-term pick, now the quickest of England's bowlers, with wicketkeeper Matt Prior revealing last week that he now noticeably hits the gloves harder than the others. But it will not just be Finn making life distinctly uncomfortable for the West Indians in the coming weeks.