A quiet word about the loudmouths

One-day series: England's World Cup experiments threatened by a mental fragility and verbal toughness

Patience is essential on this tour. It is a virtue which goes way beyond making any judgement on the England team, and it was stretched to the limit yesterday as the party travelled to – and eventually arrived in – the state of Uttar Pradesh.

England themselves, however, are testing it just as far. Nobody would have expected them to be in any other position than 2-1 down at this stage of the trip. Indeed it is a significant improvement on what many feared. But there are difficulties which must be addressed, not all of them directly connected with playing cricket.

In all three matches Engfand have failed to make enough runs on good pitches, whether batting first or second. It was known that this was vital for success to be achieved – as it will also be crucial against a rampant New Zealand next month – but so far the batsmen appear to have failed to understand the obvious.

There is aslo the small matter of England's behaviour. Small, that is, in the eyes of the match referee Denis Lindsay, and it his opinion which counts. Lindsay said yesterday: "Both sides are sailing close to the wind, but I don't think anybody overstepped the line in Madras. I will be talking to both coaches and to Andrew Flintoff but it will be a little chat not a formal thing.

"I want to make sure that nobody goes over the line and causes offence to people watching. But you need a bit of verbal argy-bargy. We have got to allow the players to have a bit of fun."

There is a school of thought which thinks that players in the old days – and Lindsay was a fine Test cricketer for South Africa in the Sixties – used to have fun by playing the game. Of course fast bowlers have always tried to undermine opposition batsmen with a droll jibe here and a sly dig there. Aggression is on the first line of their curriculum vitae unless their name happens to be Brian Statham.

Undoubtedly players bristle more now and they can also be seen in full close-up on the television screen. This is precisely what happened to Flintoff and some of his colleagues on Friday night. Flintoff is a man of sunny disposition and it was somehow contradictory to see him snarling expletives at Virender Sehwag after he had been edged for four.

Matthew Hoggard, too, gave at least one batsman an old-fashioned send-off after dismissing him and Jeremy Snape was involved in a pushing incident. Taken together the incidents made England's performance in the field unsavoury.

There is no doubt that this strategy will have stemmed from Nasser Hussain as captain and it was pretty smart on his part to make sure that his team were almost louder than the crowd of 55,000 in the Chepauk Stadium.

Hussain has the potential to become a great captain, and his tactics in the field reveal him to have a sharp brain. He has never made any secret of his desire to win or of his plan not to give any suckers on the opposition an even break. But he has to ensure that some proprieties are observed. Hussain has quite rightly had glittering prizes bestowed upon him for his efforts since he took office, but there remains a wider responsibility to the game. Push the line of what is acceptable as far as it will go, and the temptation will be to push it further next time.

The International Cricket Council, trying to demonstrate that they have teeth, publicly stated that they expected referees to impose punishments only two months ago. Lindsay has chosen not to follow that stricture. He may be right, but he may also be wrong.

England have other issues to examine. They must decide whether to restore to the side the experience of Graham Thorpe and Andrew Caddick – and a 2-1 deficit suggests that they should. It was always important that these winter trips were used for some experimentation. England must have a squad of players by the time of the World Cup next year who have all won more than 20 one-day international caps. It is obvious, therefore, that new blood has to be tried, but that has to be assessed alongside winning the series at hand.

The rotational policy, as outlined by the management team, may well bring Caddick back into the fold for tomorrow's fourth game in the series at Kanpur. The possible victim is his ertswhile opening partner, Darren Gough, who has looked pretty unfit. Matthew Hoggard, who took Caddick's place at the start of the series, has looked anything but. Caddick in any case, has England's best economy rate.

Thorpe has to come in, considering the batting failures. The left-hander, who has had problems enough lately, was in phlegmatic mood yesterday. He knows that he would certainly have played in the first game had he not suddenly fallen ill with the ubiquitous tummy trouble. But he was forced to give way to Michael Vaughan at the last moment and Vaughan seized the chance. "I like speaking to Michael about the game," Thorpe said yesterday. "He's got a very good cricketing brain and he's supported me many times over the years, so maybe it is time I supported him."

It is possible that Thorpe will replace Nick Knight, in which case Vaughan would presumably open. Knight, it is true, has yet to make a substantial contribution but equally, the Knight-Marcus Trescothick combination is still bedding itself in.

Another prospect is the dropping of the Paul Collingwood, simply to allow Thorpe into the key position at No 5, but Collingwood deserves a chance to learn the game. The selectors also have to work out how best they can find their five bowlers.

In the next week the fatigue brought on by the perpetual routine of travel, train, play will begin to take its toll. This young England side certainly have a renewed spirit and their captain retains all his determination. The chances are that they will not come back to win this series but nor will they give up trying, which is not a verdict that could have been delivered on all England teams of the past.

Like everybody else here, England will require patience. Last night it was raining in Kanpur.