After the fanfare of his ‘unretirement’, not having Stokes in their side for the first three rounds of the tournament wasn’t part of England’s plan. He’s been conspicuous in his absence, sitting on the sidelines in a Hi-Vis and aviators, the cameras panning to him periodically as England flounder on the field. As if it wasn’t already clear that no matter what difficulties England are experiencing, they’ll pin their hopes on him as the answer to all their problems.

This time, however, despite the unarguable benefits he brings to the side, his return also brings problems. With it clear he won’t be bowling during the tournament, his inclusion won’t provide England with an additional seam bowler capable of getting through a sizable chunk of overs in their top six. To fit him back in, they must either sacrifice depth in their bowling attack or continue with a precarious-looking top-heavy batting lineup.

Before the tournament started, it was generally accepted that Stokes and Harry Brook would not play in the same XI. Brook has been in the side so far under the understanding that Stokes would come back in the moment his hip allowed. But, given England’s batting has looked vulnerable in two of their three matches so far, playing Brook and Stokes into the same XI seems a comforting prospect, especially after Brook’s authoritative half-century against Afghanistan.

To do this, they would also have to keep Liam Livingstone in the side – the other batter who could drop out for Stokes. While Livingstone hasn’t performed with the bat so far, his contributions with the ball have been more than useful. The ten overs he got through against Afghanistan were crucial. They meant Jos Buttler didn’t have to turn back to a wayward Chris Woakes or Sam Curran.

An economical spell from Liam Livingstone.

It’s the first time he’s bowled 10 overs in an ODI.#CWC23 pic.twitter.com/PAwX7QMlEj

— Wisden (@WisdenCricket) October 15, 2023

Incidentally, Livingstone’s above expectations dependability with the ball could pave the way for England to adjust their balance. With Woakes and Curran showing no sign of improvement through three innings, it seems inevitable at least one of them will miss out. While David Willey could replace one and not compromise batting depth, if both are taken out, the only other option to come in is Gus Atkinson. His added pace with the new ball would be welcome, but he won’t provide the same potential for runs as either Woakes or Curran.

That would leave England with a tail of Adil Rashid, Mark Wood, Reece Topley and Atkinson. Less than ideal when your batters have only passed 300 once so far this tournament.

[breakout id=”0″][/breakout]

However, by replacing Curran with Stokes rather than one of Atkinson or Willey, that tail looks slightly less worrisome. In terms of the batting lineup, it could allow Buttler to slot back down into six, where he spent most of his time during the 2019 World Cup, from which he can marshal the end of the innings. It would also mean Livingstone drops down to seven, which seems like a more natural position.

Where this solution potentially comes undone is its reliance on Livingstone, and to a lesser extent Joe Root, in getting through at least ten overs between them. While they’ve both been useful so far, there’s a difference between being useful and being relied on to bowl a sizeable chunk of overs.

There’s no perfect solution to fit Stokes back in, with depth compromised in either discipline from whatever balance England decide to go with. But regardless of the complexity, England are a much stronger side for his inclusion. He is England’s best hope of turning their competition around.