Bell shouldn't be in consideration....should he?

There's various speculation about who replaces Flintoff for the next Test in West Indies (incidentally I'm totally confused about why it's called the 4th Test and the last Test was called the 3rd - surely it was just the 2nd rescheduled?).

This Guardian article concerns me in that it even considers Ian Bell. There are two options: (1) bat Prior at 6, if he's available given the imminent birth of his first child, with Broad at 7 and 4 other bowlers. (2) play Bopara at 6 so that we go in with 4 and a bit bowlers. Bell is nowhere in either option.

Personally I'd go for the second option and play Bopara, get runs on the board and then - using 4 specialist bowlers - pressure them out. That puts the pressure on both the bowlers and the captain as tactics are vital, but when our top bowlers are struggling, I'm not quite sure how adding our 5th best bowler is suddenly expected to make us into a brilliant bowling unit. I'd rather rely on the top 4 and attacking fields.

Would anyone seriously consider playing Bell?