Ollie Pope’s shoulder dislocation could not have come at a worse point in the series. After nearly a decade of searching, he looked to be a permanent solution to England’s relentless search for Test No.3. Asked to step up to the position from the start of the Brendon McCullum-Ben Stokes era, he has since scored three hundreds and averages 45.25. But, with Pope out for the rest of the summer, a makeshift solution – workable enough to continue the stability Pope has provided to the top order – must be found in double-quick time.

At Headingley, both Harry Brook and Moeen Ali were tried out. While both struggled, it seems to be the consensus that Brook shouldn’t be tried again in a position he’s never batted in previously and which he’s not suited to. Moeen has had several goes at filling in at three but, despite his willingness to move up the order, his predictable innings at Headingley means England should be considering other options before inking him in for another go. Here is the case for Moeen, as well as the other possibilities.

Moeen Ali

The biggest bonus of going with Moeen at three is that it would disrupt the rest of England’s order the least. He will allow them to continue with their powerhouse middle-order, with Jonny Bairstow coming in down at No.7. That balance also means they can continue to play four seamers, especially with Woakes as an all-rounder, taking the pressure off Stokes having to bowl many overs.

It’s also potentially important that he wanted to be the one to move up the order for the second innings at Headingley. As a hugely experienced player, he negates the potential scarring which could be done to a younger player by forcing them to bat out of position against a new ball at such an important point in the series.

But Moeen is not a No.3. He’s batted at every position in the top nine, but his worst average is when he bats at three (13.14). His aggression will be lauded as in-keeping with the mentality of the side, but the type of aggression Moeen bats with is not the same as what’s allowed England’s top order to score so quickly over the last year.

Maybe, with no perfect solution, there’s something to be said for opting for a sacrificial lamb, someone who’ll score a quick 20 and provide the rest of their justification in wickets and vibes. But, with England’s perpetual batting crises, which at Headingley were miraculously resurrected twice, stability is still important.

Ben Stokes

Stokes is always England’s solution in a crisis. If no wickets are falling, he’s the one to bowl himself into the ground until one inevitable comes, his five sixes off Todd Murphy to drag England back from the depths were arguably where Australia lost the game at Headingley. It’s only natural he’s considered as a solution in this scenario too.

The biggest factor to take into account here is that Stokes needs to bowl as little as possible for the remainder of the series. His body looks more and more fragile with every innings, and bowling himself seriously risks his ability to keep playing. Given his incredible form with the bat, this creates an environment to facilitate his move up to three.

With no overs in his legs, there’s less need for him to spend as much time recovering as possible before he comes into bat. As one of the two most able and technically sound options, he naturally suits No.3 more than perhaps any of the other options. The worry for England is that Stokes is so good because of where he bats.

He’s the one to get England over the line when everyone else has failed. Brook did an incredible job of it at Headingley, but more often than not, Stokes is the man trusted to drag wins from the jaws of defeat. A move up to three would limit his ability to do that. It might be a negative approach to the problem, but the way England play means it has to be taken into account.

Joe Root

Many pundits have spent years agonising over whether Root should bat at three. But the simple answer is, he doesn’t want to and, if you’re Joe Root, that should be enough. He’s England’s best batter and as such, he warrants the protection that No.4 should afford him.

Getting the best out of Root could also be key to England winning the series, and No.4 is where they are most likely to get that. It’s worth remembering that, since Edgbaston, Root hasn’t been at his best. Asking him to bat in a position he has resisted for so long is not the best way to refind that performance level.

Dan Lawrence

Lawrence is the spare batter in the squad. Because England opted to make no changes after their Headingley win, he is the one expected to slot into whatever position England need. He’s batted at three before in Tests and is off the back of a superb Championship hundred for Essex – batting at four.

However, it seems unlikely he’ll come into the side at Old Trafford. He wasn’t chosen to be their backup option at Headingley when there was first a vacancy, and including him would also mean dropping someone else, probably a bowler. That will thin out the bowling attack considerably, taking into consideration Stokes’s injuries. Equally, if – as expected – Mark Wood retains his place at Old Trafford, relying on him to bowl more overs in a three-bowler seam attack would be inherently risky.

Harry Brook

It also seems unlikely that Brook will be asked to reprise his role. McCullum was the one who had assured that Brook would be dropping back to five for the second innings at Headingley. Having implied that he doesn’t feel Brook is the best option in the side for that position, moving him back up again would be odd. Besides, he showed how essential he can be down the order in the second innings. Without him at six, England would not have won that match.