Stewart still in World Cup picture

James Foster batted at nine in Zimbabwe

James Foster has not done enough to usurp Alec Stewart just yet, says BBC Sport Online's Thrasy Petropoulos.

To judge from his usual workload, be it with bat, gloves or as tireless motivator, Alec Stewart will not have known what to do with himself while England were in Zimbabwe.

For the first time since first touring with the national side more than a decade ago, he opted to stay at home and, apart from the odd booking as a television pundit, found himself one of the nation's many other armchair observers.

So what did Stewart make of James Foster, the 21-year-old with experience of only 12 first-class matches who is supposed to be his long-term heir behind the stumps?

The most obvious conclusion is that he would have discerned very little about the Essex youngster's batting.

Foster performed well enough with the gloves - indeed, apart from a few missed chances, he handled himself well, completing three stumpings and showing himself capable of putting disappointment to the back of his mind.

Alec Stewart can still bat brilliantly

Rather, with England winning all five one-day matches comfortably, Foster was only called on once to bat, and that was only for three-and-a-half overs at the conclusion of their innings of the fourth match.

But the margins of England's victories in the matches in which they batted second - by five, eight, four and seven wickets - reveals a different story that coach Duncan Fletcher might wish to ponder on.

It would be expected in an international cricket match won by five or fewer wickets that the wicketkeeper plays some roll with the bat.

Foster, however, was down to come in at No.9 in all five matches.

Fletcher's different view

For Essex, Foster is regarded as more of a batsman than a keeper, but for England Fletcher clearly believes that his immediate future lies in the lower order.

That may change of course if Foster is permitted an extended run but it should not be forgotten that this tour was less about beating Zimbabwe than building a side for the next World Cup, little more than a year away.

If England are to compete with the big boys in South Africa in early 2003, it is unlikely that they will feel comfortable with a wicketkeeper coming in only one place above the opening bowlers.

Foster still has a great deal to learn

The answer, as in the past, can only be to turn to Alec Stewart.

Stewart has made it clear that his cricketing future does not extend beyond the next World Cup, making it vital that England identify a successor within the next year.

Whoever they try, however - and apart from Foster it is difficult to see a credible alternative - it is hard to see past the 38-year-old Stewart, the only world class all-rounder England have fielded since Ian Botham.

Stewart's extra dimension

By batting in the top six, Stewart adds a dimension that has been absent in Zimbabwe - be it another specialist batsman or bowler.

Against the very best cricketers it is unrealistic to expect a middle order of allrounders, such as England have gone for in Zimbabwe, to perform as they have over the past fortnight.

True, Stewart's recent form with the bat in one-day cricket has been dire - an average of under 18 over the past 10 matches and only one score beyond 30.

But it should be remembered that it is little more than a year since he put together scores of 74, 101, 100 and 97 in just over a week of one-day internationals against the West Indies and Zimbabwe.

To blood Foster now makes sense as far as England's long-term plans are concerned, and there are still the India and New Zealand legs of the tour for him to make his case with the bat.

However, from the start of next season England should play their ideal World Cup XI every time.

So, even with a five-nil whitewash of Zimbabwe, the biggest winner of England's one-day tour, could well be a player who chose to stay behind.