West Indies' performance in the first Test has received praise from many quarters. Yet they lost by five wickets. How times have changed.

Many bags were packed and ready to go on the fourth morning. Surrey with their usual sensitivity – and a measure of ingenuity – offered Test spectators, who might have felt short-changed, free entry to their Sunday afternoon CB40 game at The Oval. Yet the Test was still going at Lord's on the Monday afternoon.

West Indies did not bow to the inevitable. Shivnarine Chanderpaul found an adhesive partner in Marlon Samuels; the tail wagged; Kemar Roach generated decent pace and for a moment or two England were severely inconvenienced. Before the Test started West Indies were quoted at 12‑1 to win. When England were 57 for four on Monday morning those odds looked silly.

So West Indies' commitment and spirit have been lauded almost to the point of their being patronised. These tourists under the enthusiastic direction of their coach, Ottis Gibson, and captain, Darren Sammy, are seen to be busting a gut, which is admirable. But they do not win. For some this is not enough; certainly the giants of the past who can now be found in the media centres, men like Michael Holding and Vivian Richards, who have touched the pinnacle in maroon caps, are not content with gallant losers.

West Indies have a dilemma that afflicts so many teams in different sports. In simple terms (though nothing is really simple with West Indian cricket) it is this: is it better to stick with players of limited abilities who are totally committed to the cause? They may not be that good but they try like fury. Or should the mavericks with far more talent be incorporated, which heightens the risk of the team ethic disintegrating but is likely to increase the chances of victory?

There is no simple answer in this balancing act. A decade ago in the Caribbean it was hard to avoid the conclusion that West Indies could not play with Brian Lara in the team. But they could not play without him either. England once agonised more than we might imagine about Andrew Flintoff and Steve Harmison. Samit Patel and Ian Blackwell have appeared less frequently at international level, both good cricketers but what about those waistlines? How much leeway should be given to those who are gifted yet wayward and who do not conform to every message from the hierarchy?

These are the sorts of questions that have been asked for different reasons in a variety of team sports. Those dominating the discussion have included – in no particular order – Jimmy Greaves, Paul Gascoigne, Danny Cipriani, Stuart Barnes, Dimitar Berbatov, Stan Bowles, Frank Worthington, Matt Le Tissier, Mario Balotelli, Joey Barton and even, no doubt, John Terry. Is the baggage worthwhile?

The impression is that the current West Indies regime, despite the summoning of the "maverick" Tino Best as a replacement for the injured Shannon Gabriel, places commitment and adherence to the regime very high on its list of priorities. Ramnaresh Sarwan, who has been publicly castigated by the West Indian board for his lack of fitness over the last 18 months, is scoring his runs for Leicestershire rather than his country. That is the choice of the selectors.

Ask the English bowlers whom they would prefer to bowl to, Sarwan or Kieran Powell, and they would go for the latter. Offer Chris Gayle as an alternative to Powell and the answer would be more emphatic. In the best possible world a skilful, confident management team can incorporate the high-maintenance individuals into the team; in the worst those individuals can wreck the side. The safer route, nearer to the current West Indian way, is to go for the earnestly committed. Currently that path leads to respectable defeats.

Of course, the problem is nowhere near that simple for West Indies. Most of the so‑called mavericks are not available anyway. The Indian Premier League takes its toll.

It is possible for England and Australia to offer some sort of financial alternative to key players, who are attractive to the IPL, but in the West Indies, New Zealand or Sri Lanka that is not the case, no matter how deft and efficient their cricket boards become (and some of them could hardly be described so generously).

In practical terms it is well nigh impossible for the West Indies board to stop Gayle, Dwayne Bravo, Kieran Pollard, Andre Russell or Sunil Narine going off to the IPL. The trouble is that it is almost as difficult to envisage West Indies winning many games beyond those against Bangladesh without them.