Chris Woakes picked 3 for 48 ©AFP
A penny for Chris Woakes' thoughts after he had seen first Ben Stokes and then Saqib Mahmood pick up wickets on day two in Grenada, with deliveries that stayed low, leaving the batters helpless. Woakes' opening spell had been wicketless again. He had only taken two wickets in 71 overs of bowling during the series to that point. Why, Woakes might have been thinking, couldn't one of his deliveries have stayed down? Where was his good fortune?

When England decided to leave James Anderson and Stuart Broad out of the squad for this series, Woakes was the surprising choice to lead the attack in the Caribbean. While the Warwickshire all-rounder has a superb record at home, his overseas performances have been far less effective. For this series, England left out two bowlers who averaged 23 and 26 during the Ashes for one who took six wickets in three matches at an average of 55.

Things had hardly improved that much during the first two Tests. Woakes had taken just two wickets across England's four bowling innings and was clearly the least effective English seamer in Antigua and arguably the least effective in Barbados. He may well have been dropped for this game if Ollie Robinson had been fit.

Woakes did not start well with the new ball on day two in Grenada either, a theme of his series to date. He was too wide and too inconsistent. The West Indies' openers were able to have plenty of sighters and at a time when batting should have been at its most difficult, with a surface offering the bowlers something to work with, it was all far too easy for Kraigg Brathwaite and John Campbell.

The all-rounder's inconsistency with the new ball in this series has been surprising. At home, when the ball moves, Woakes is in his element. He opens the bowling for his county and cleans up. Given the opportunity to lead the attack here, perhaps he has been trying too hard. Perhaps he has, as all bowlers do from time to time, struggled for rhythm. Either way, for a bowler whose strength should be in utilising the new ball, Woakes has been poor.

It was not before time then when he found a better groove after the lunch break. He bowled straighter, making the batters play more, and his lengths were more consistent and, crucially, more aggressive. He appeared to be running in harder and hitting the pitch with more conviction too. In Woakes' first spell, it was too comfortable for the batters. In his second, batting was suddenly more challenging.

The aggressive lengths that Woakes found did for Nkrumah Bonner who was bounced out, surprised by a short ball that he tried, but failed, to get out of the way of. The relief on Woakes' face was obvious. In the same over, Jason Holder skied an attempted pull shot, late on the ball, and was caught at deep square leg. Both deliveries seemed to kick off the surface a little quicker than the batters thought they might.

Two overs later, Woakes gave Jermaine Blackwood a working over. Second ball, the batter just kept out a straight one that kept low. The very next delivery Blackwood fenced at a ball that rose sharply, the ball flying just passed gully for four. Next up, the fourth ball of the over, the Jamaican was LBW, pinned on the crease to a good length ball that caused uncertainty in his footwork.

In all, Woakes spell after lunch read seven overs, 3 for 21. It was a crucial intervention and looked to have swung the game England's way. It was the sort of intervention that England's interim management hoped for when entrusting Woakes with the leadership mantle for this trip but which, before that spell, had been missing from his performances.

The context is important here, of course. This has been the most helpful pitch to the fast-bowlers all series and the Dukes ball has been Woakes' friend at home. Holder's shot was a poor one while Blackwood might look back at his dismissal and wonder how he missed a straight ball. It was a fine spell by Woakes but he had some things go in his favour too. Nor, it should be remembered, did he take another wicket in the day as West Indies regrouped and moved into the lead.

Even so, few would begrudge Woakes those wickets and that spell. He is one of the most respected players in English cricket. The happiness of his teammates after each dismissal showed that. They love him. Why wouldn't they? Every time Woakes takes the field, he gives it his all. Unlike Robinson, for example, there would never be any cause to doubt Woakes' commitment or his fitness. He doesn't complain, he doesn't moan. He just does what is asked of him.

But should one spell, no matter how impressive, no matter how important, no matter how happy it makes everyone feel, burnish Woakes' overseas credentials to such an extent that England stick with him next winter? Or does the evidence of his previous 19 away Tests, including the first two of this series, outweigh all that?

In the cold light of day, the obvious answer is no, this performance should not change anything. Woakes is a fine bowler in English conditions, a world-class operator with a world-class record. England should pick him for every home Test match that he is fit and available for. But he is simply not an effective bowler overseas. He has been given plenty of opportunity. But he still averages more than 50 runs per wicket away from home.

In an ideal world, England would want a bowling attack consisting of bowlers who are good in every type of condition. But England are not in an ideal world right now in Test cricket. They do not have a raft of bowlers who have the attributes to be successful in all conditions. In fact, they arguably only have two: James Anderson and Jofra Archer.

So adopting a more horses for courses approach appears to be a better way forward rather than trying to make Woakes an all-condition bowler when there is little evidence that he can become one. Such an approach - picking him solely at home - would probably prolong Woakes' career, enabling England to get more out of him, and allow youngsters like Matt Fisher and Saqib Mahmood to develop their overseas repertoires. It makes a lot of sense.

This was a good day for Chris Woakes, to be sure. But it should not cloud England's judgement about his long-term ability to be part of their attack away from home. That assessment needs to include all of Woakes' performances this winter, not just one spell. And as much as everyone wishes it wasn't the case, the evidence is irrefutable. Away from home - and only away from home - England need to move on.