Selection of the World Cup squads has been universally criticised, which may provide some consolation to David Graveney & Co who have escaped heavy criticism for the exclusion of Stuart Broad and, to a lesser degree, Mal Loye.
Their escape came from the last few results in the tri-nations finals against Australia. But, instead of ignoring the fact that the toss and weather gave England the advantage in Sydney and that Australia's two defeats by New Zealand coincided with the absence of Ricky Ponting, Adam Gilchrist, Michael Clarke, Andrew Symonds and Brett Lee, they listened to Duncan Fletcher again and chose Sajid Mahmood ahead of Broad.
By the end of the coming summer, it will be a major surprise if young Broad is not in the Test side, and it is an astonishing decision to exclude him entirely from the worst winter abroad that England have had in many years, notwithstanding the last two weeks.
The boy oozes talent and it is no argument that he is too young — he has a lovely repetitive action and has inherited a feisty approach from his father, Chris.
Liam Plunkett has earned his World Cup place, as has the slightly less impressive James Anderson, although his back injury is a worry. Mahmood has not earned selection and that particular pigeon will come home to roost under conditions in the Caribbean that could not be more different from those in Australia.
The white ball will swing less; the grounds are tiny in comparison with Melbourne, Perth, Brisbane and Sydney; every game will be played in daylight and the pitch surfaces will generally be slow and low.
Hence, the West Indies dropping slinger Fidel Edwards and other out-and-out pacemen in favour of fast-medium dobbers. England badly need a third reliable paceman behind Andrew Flintoff and Paul Collingwood and the squad does not include one — those selected are "iffers" who might or might not deliver in any spell. That is why the England cricketers can expect to be eliminated at the second stage, the Super Eights.
As for Loye, he might still be called up if Michael Vaughan does not make it yet again.
He might well be suspect against the best bowlers in the world but, as he showed with his 45 at Sydney, he is the only top-three batsman capable of blasting through the 20 overs of power-play and he could well do that against several lesser countries.
If Kevin Pietersen is allowed to indulge himself yet again in the batting order and does not come in at No 3, England will have missed one of the few tricks they hold.
Every other country in the top eight seeds play their most destructive card at No 3, starting with Ponting. It seems blindingly obvious to everyone except the England management that your best batsman should be at the crease for the longest possible time in a 50-over match.
Enough of England and their self-inflicted problems; what about the other sides? South Africa are plagued with reverse racial discrimination and have yielded to governmental pressure to select seven non-whites in their 15 to the exclusion on merit of Boetha Dippenaar and Johann van de Wath, as only two examples.
Their cover was blown at a function to announce their squad when Afrikaans Sunday newspaper Rapport, who had run a leak 24 hours previously, sent their cricket writer. He had not only named the 15 but went further, with a first XI omitting four of the obligatory non-whites including Roger Telemachus.
He is no midget and caused quite a rumpus at the function when he towered over the hack and apparently offered him free plastic surgery and dental work!
Mushtaq Mohammad, an adopted Brummie, has criticised Pakistan for selecting three injured fast bowlers. Also, "Mushie" rightly moans about wicketkeeper Kamran Akmal keeping his place after succeeding in keeping Geraint Jones out of bottom place in international cricket during the last two years and that is some achievement.
Australia have copped it from their media for the inclusion of Shane Watson, labelled as "the most over-hyped, under-achieving all-rounder to wear a Baggy Green in many years".
Australia will bounce back, especially as, after a mad month, they have lost their No 1 ranking to South Africa in the cranky world lists.
As to the World cup itself, India, Sri Lanka and Pakistan should provide the winner of what is a shameful money-spinning exercise.
How can it take 51 matches over seven weeks, the first two of which feature 24 mis-matches, to turf out Canada, Bermuda, Zimbabwe, Netherlands, Bangladesh, Ireland, Scotland and Kenya?
The first 24 matches are followed by 27 in 32 days to reduce eight teams to four and only then will there be drama over five days, with two semi-finals and a final.
If football can stage a 32-team World Cup in a month, why does cricket take seven weeks for 16 teams? The answer is money, with which the International Cricket Council has weakly allowed itself to become obsessed by the Asian bloc.
Injuries, burn-out, early retirements and an imbalanced itinerary keep England on the road for two years, but Australia have a break from Test cricket for eight months and from all cricket for five months. That is the price cricket is paying in this modern era.