If comedy is tragedy plus time, then maybe sagacity is comedy plus time. The first reaction to Darren Pattinson’s shock England call-up was a frantic combination of laughter, open-mouthed bewilderment, mild sympathy for Pattinson’s kids (who were set for a day out at Alton Towers) and emailing/texting as many of your friends as possible to see if they’d heard the news.

From hereon in, JFK moments will be known as Pattinson moments. Yet the more the decision marinates, the less it stinks. In fact, if you ignore the extraneous fluff that has contributed to an unusually manic Friday in England’s serene selectorial world – the return of Andrew Flintoff, the possibly permanent dropping of Paul Collingwood, the inexplicable promotion to No 6 of Tim Ambrose – it is entirely logical.

We have seen many horses-for-courses selections at Headingley in modern times, most famously Neil Mallender in 1992, Mike Smith in 1997 and Martin Bicknell in 2003, but Pattinson does not fall into that category. The fact is that England lost a new-ball swing bowler, Ryan Sidebottom, and needed a like-for-like replacement.

That immediately rules out Chris Tremlett and Steve Harmison, who are pitch-thumpers rather than pitch-kissers. Simon Jones can swing the new ball, but has only taken it once in his Test career – in his final innings to date, at Trent Bridge in 2005 – and is much more natural in the role of old-ball enforcer. He doesn’t even take the new ball for his county.

That leaves Matthew Hoggard, who, given that he was England’s premier bowler only seven months ago, might legitimately have expected a recall. But it would seem that the selectors decided at some stage during the winter that Hoggard had lost something – a yard of nip, probably – and that it wasn’t coming back. They absolutely have the right to make such judgements, and in many ways should be applauded for such brave, original decision-making.

So, by a process of elimination we come to the in-form Pattinson, who swings it at a very decent pace. We cannot say that he is a completely maverick selection, as he was included in England’s provisional Champions Trophy at the stat of the month, so it is fair to assume that he has been watched for much of the summer by the selectors and that they have been hugely impressed. Who are we to argue with that? Of those criticising the selection, how many have actually ever seen Pattinson bowl? About 3%, I’d say.

There are three other reasons to contend the validity of Pattinson’s selection: his age (30 next month), his background (born in Grimsby but raised in Australia) and the fact that he is a late bloomer (this is only his 12th first-class game). Contemporary selections (Ryan Sidebottom, Tim Ambrose) invalidate any issues over age and background, and the fact that he’s a late bloomer is an almost imperceptible detail in the bigger picture. Indeed in some sports it’s seen as a virtue, due to the hunger and freshness intrinsically associated with those who take such a career path.

A year ago, England were ridiculed when they called up an ageing swing bowler as cover for their injured premier swing bowler ahead of the Headingley Test. Ryan Sidebottom took eight wickets and never looked back. Whether Pattinson succeeds or fails, it is hard to fault the logic of the selection.