England should not gamble on Vaughan
As so often seems to be the case, the question of injuries again clouds the announcement of an England squad.
At least the good news is that Kevin Pietersen is definitely fit to board the flight to the West Indies on 2 March but a serious doubt looms over Michael Vaughan, who is fighting a strained hamstring.
The manner in which the World Cup is selected permits injured players to be replaced - but surely England will not take this risk with the captain?...
Too often - including this winter - we have seen players sent on tours when they have not been fit enough, and the effect of the captain having to return home early would have a seriously destabilising effect on the team.
Besides, is Vaughan really that important a member of England's one-day team to justify such a gamble?
He managed a score of only 26 in the three matches he was fit enough to play in Australia, he averages only 27 in his 74 one-day international innings and has never scored a century.
While Vaughan is an outstanding captain, it was Andrew Flintoff who led England to their success in the Commonwealth Bank Trophy in Australia. Does England really need the disruption of waiting, again, to discover who is going to lead the team?
One thing must be absolutely sure: Vaughan must face the most rigorous and thorough of fitness tests at least a week before the team is due to leave. The slightest doubt, and he stays at home.
It is tempting to be less severe on the seam bowlers, simply because they can easily be replaced at the drop of a hat. Jon Lewis and James Anderson will need to be checked out, and England urgently need them to pass their tests, because without them, England’s pace attack is very inexperienced indeed.
Mal Loye is unlucky to have missed out - but while his improvisation was briefly entertaining and successful in Australia, he would be worked out.
Should Vaughan not make the trip, Loye will probably be his replacement, and that would also bring Strauss - who could otherwise find it tough nailing down a place - into the frame.
Ravi Bopara is a useful utility player under these circumstances, and who would have thought, only a few weeks ago, that England would send 36-year-old Paul Nixon to the World Cup as the wicket-keeper?
To be fair, Nixon's upbeat and vociferous approach has been widely credited with England’s resurgence in Australia, but his selection illustrates quite how open the race is to keep wicket for England next summer.
Loye should have been a certainty for the squad.
He can win a game on his own, and could have partnered Joyce or Vaughan opening.
Bopara wont play a game, cos he is neither good enough or experienced enough.
Complain about this postThe problem is that there is now no-one at the top of the order who can make runs quickly. So Pieterson will always be under pressure when he comes in. If it's 2-24, he'll be under pressure to dig in. If it's 2-100 after 25, he'll be under pressure to up the rate. Sometimes he'll come off, sometimes not, and then people will start droning on about "playing for the team". Not a very clever way to use your best batsman.
Loye will not come off every time (neither does Gilchrist - far from it) but he would, once or twice, make a real difference.
Glad to see Bopara there, but he should be replacing Dalrymple. Can anyone tell me exactly what his role is ?
Complain about this postI agree with you Aggers. There is no point in taking a partially fit Vaughan to the World Cup when you can have another batsman taking his place. Vaughan's captaincy may be good, but that is only one side of the game.
Complain about this postI also think that the inclusion of Ravi Bopara will be an inspired one. He deserves to be given a chance after all the excellent work he's been doing for Essex. Come on England!
aggers,no we dont need vaughan,simple as
weve made strides forward in thepast 4 games v new zealand and australia,now just through squad selection alone,we take a backward step by leaving out loye who can make the most of the power plays.
with vaughan/joyce/bell in the top 3,can anyone see us making 100 plus from the opening 20 overs?
australia,india etc will be doing that.
so we go back to relying heavily on pieterson and flintoff to get our score close to 300.
bopara maybe a promising player but we had a game plan with loye at top of order to get innings off to a flier which he did on a few occasions in his 6/7 games.
whereas bobara to my knowledge played just the once yet is picked as yet another all rounder.
dont we have enough all rounders in flintoff,collingwood,dalrymple ???
i think so !!
any thoughts ????
Complain about this postI feel sorry for Loye. I too doubt he has enough class and variety in his game to succeed at the top level for long, but his introduction in Australia helped England's batting. His attacking intent in the early powerplays gave us a different option, and when he came off it created time for Collingwood etc to play their own games. A quick 40 or 50 is sometimes enough in one day cricket to get things moving - I'm not convinced that Vaughan's more conventional batting approach will have the same effect. Then again, I very much doubt Vaughan will make it onto the field, so I suspect Loye will be lining up against New Zealand in any case.
Complain about this postBopara ahead of Loye makes absolutely no sense.
It is indeed very Theo Walcott esc. If he was going to be picked, why wasnt he playing in the CB finals?
Everyone can see he wont play a game, and Mal Loye is one of the best one day players in the country who could make best use of the power plays, particularly with the small carribean boundaries.
Big mistake!
Complain about this postI dont think Vaughan is worth the gamble to be honest, how many comebacks will this be now ?? Quite happy with the squad, Pietersen to come back can only be good news, Mal loye can feel a little unlucky, he looks a better one day batsmen than Strauss at the moment, still would like to see Matt Prior given a chance, can you tell i'm from Sussex ?
Complain about this postIf I was a betting man I would have to say that Mal Loye is probably going to play in this World Cup. There is more chance of Andrew Strauss playing a straight drive than there is Micheal Vaughan not pulling up with another injury. This always happens with England, selector making ridiculous decisions.
Ravi Bopara is in the 15 as a specialist 12th man. The selectors thinking is that Vaughan is going to play in every single game and Bopara will do a better job as a 12th man than Loye.
Form is temporary, class is permanent but has Strauss got what it takes in the one dayers. If you bat in the top three you have to be able to play big shots, so why does Strauss rely on guiding the ball between the wicket keeper and the slips.
Mark my words Loye will play in the World Cup!
Complain about this postI think Vaughan has to go, i agree his record in onedayers isn't fabulous by any means, but England came very close to winning the ICC Trophy in England under his captaincy. He is arguably the best Captain in world cricket, and this releases Flintoff to do what he does best. I honestly believe Vaughan could be the difference between getting to the semis and possibly winning the competition.
Complain about this postMal Loye should be in the squad. He can provide the unexpected when needed.
He only needed that one big score which sadly didn't come.
Complain about this postI agree that Vaughan should not be in the squad. It's unquestionable that he is a great captain and has an effect on the side, but they should probably have him there as a consultant captain or something (but only so that he doesn't interfere.) There's no way his body will stand up to the pressure of the tournament and it's about time the question was answered. Sadly the only viable option is Strauss, but then he does seem to play better as captain.
Likewise with Nixon - I simply can't understand the thinking of it. If he was hands down the best keeper then it might make some sense, but he is NOT, and he's so old now that how long can his International career realistically last? If I was Read, I would seriously consider emigrating to a country that would take him seriously.
Loye was unlucky to miss out, I think he's got that one day edge that England really need.
Complain about this postFinally we had someone who could give us a quick start and he's not picked. If Loye could do well against Austrailia surely he would have done better against the other nations. Vaughan's current form and one day average is woeful...I dont think he's even made a century in a one day game. It's always two steps forward one step back because of the England selectors.
Complain about this postFor England to have any chance of winning the world cuo we must pick players the are hitting current form and to someone like Michael Vaughan who not only is a big doubt through injury has not played enough cricket and scored enough runs to warrant a place. Strauss is lucky but has played a small part in a recent winning team and a few runs against the smaller teams may help. The unlucky player must be Mal Loye, first he makes the team and would have to overcome the nerves and pressure ,which i believe he has and proved in the 2nd one day final and now with rum=ns under his belt and fuuly fit would prove far more usefull than either a injured and not good one dayer in Vauaghan or a complete rookie in Bopara.
We are a ,imited team so do not mess to muck with a current wining side.
Complain about this postVaughan's selection is questionable. Do we want to play with 10 players in the team and not 11. He may be a good captain but not a good odi player. And his injury thing makes everyone lose focus from the main thing. Anyone else who has an average of 35+ in odi format should have been selected. Or maybe even now, they dont play him and instead play Bopara or Strauss from current team. Vaughan should be made a deputy coach to Fletch, bcos thats what he does basically.
Complain about this postMorts, surely it's better to play a promising youngster who can bowl than a nearly-man like Loye?
Bopara scored a fine hundred for Essex in a match against Australia in the 2005 Ashes tour, the only other man to have surpassed that score on that day was a certain Alistair Cook. You mark my words Bopara is something special. We've been looking for a "new flintoff" for a while now and have unsuccessfully treid out guys like Rikki Clarke, but I suspect Bopara will emerge as Engalnd's next best all-rounder....
Complain about this postA fit Vaughan isn't good enough to go, Vaughan in this state will be a liability.
Mal Loye is desperately unlucky and, in my humble opinion, showed enough to have warranted a place. His 30's and 40's were scored quickly enough to set a momentum which the others were good enough to continue.
If Vaughan stays fit, and stays in, he'll score too slowly and put the lower order under pressure.
Complain about this postloye must be cursing ian bell for that run out on sunday. ok, one innings should not be the sole factor but if he had gone on to make a 70 or 80 in a final then his case would have been that much stronger.
Complain about this postas for nixon, could he be the man to keep wicket at test level until the next ashes series?
his glovework has looked sound in the cb series (apart from taking the ball in front of the stumps). if his batting is up to test standard - and neither jones nor read impressed in australia - then why not look to get two good years out of him. he's certainly fit enough.
I think England are right to take a chance on Vaughan. His captaincy, regardless of his batting record in ODIs, is absolutely essential to the team. Although Flintoff led the team to victory in the finals, there is no doubt that it was Vaughan's arrival for the one day series in Australia that arrested the decline and instilled some much needed organisation, confidence and self-belief in the team. His skills as a captain in a tight one day match can be the difference between winning and being on the next plane home.
Complain about this postLet's be honest here... If michael Vaughan were not this " chosen one " as a leader... he would never retained his place in any ODI team in world cricket bar maybe Zim and Bang. No ODI hundreds and a very average Average!
Great test batsman/opener yes....ODIs there is still a big question mark about him.
Also Loye should have gone... every serious team has got a "basher" at the top of the order.... his role would have been to just go out and hit the ball!
Maybe Vaughan will be sent home due to injury troubles and Loye could still play some part in the WC for england.
Complain about this postAs an Irish man I cant understand why and how Ed Joyce who played for Ireland in the qualification for the world cup can now turn around and be playing for England in the world cup... Can someone please explain
Complain about this postI havent read any posts yet...my my 2 bob is that freddy should stay on as captain. he has only just began to get the feel of the position and chopping and changing again would not be good for the poms. being consistant stars at the top. who is more consistant (in recent form), vaughn or flintoff??
Complain about this postMV's inclusion is absurd.
He has never been a good ODI player and is not going to suddenly become so in the twilight of his career.
But never fear, Mal Loye should have his bags packed anyway as MV will not be fit, not even remotely so.
Complain about this postI think people seem to quickly forget how important a captain is in cricket, without Vaughan's leadership during the Ashes England were frequently clueless with no game plan. Anyone attending the tests at the SCG/MCG would testify to. Whilst Vaughan's record in the one day game is average at best his ability to lead England and outthink the opposing captains is not matched by Flintoff. It was interesting during the Ashes how poor Flintoff's leadership prevented England from turning those key moments their way, with Vaughan's captaincy im sure that they would have. I am not saying they would have won the ashes but they would have competed better. Also since Freddie has had captaincy removed his form has dramatically improved, playing Vaughan allows Freddie to be Freddie. Also now with Vaughan's constant injury issues i can understand the debate but his presence in the team will be good for the team and if he stays fit will defintely be an asset. As for Loye, i do feel sorry for him but he has already been worked out, his one shot pull wont achieve much on a consistent basis and i think england should be picking players with good technique, so players like Shah have been unlucky to not to have been given a chance. Funny how the last 2 weeks have totally changed England's perception of what they will do in the world cup...let's hope that this form continues over the lengthy 7 weeks that is the world cup!
Complain about this postI will never understand why people think Dalrymple is good, he went for too many runs and averaged about 12 in the CB series.....so what if he took a good catch, apart from that his fielding was truly appalling. This squad is weak, compare the quality of the players to our 1996 squad. Granted we did badly that time round but standards were higher than and at least they were all proper cricketers with good ODI records, this side is full of bits n pieces players.
Complain about this posti also think KP should be opening for the poms in IDO games. the team lacks 'tonkers' in the top order ....vaughn especially is a slow player of the ball, and usually gets out when trying to raise the run-rate. still, he has very good cricket mind, but is this enough for him to gain a spot?
Complain about this postIt does seem a risky strategy to include Vaughan. I am not alone in thinking his ODI career to be flawed. Loye would offer something positively different to the English batting order. Without Trescothick the England top three are very similar in style.
I am also rather saddened at Fletcher and others treatment of the admirable Chris Read. He kept superbly when asked to do so. And he averaged slightly higher with the bat that Jones and Nixon. It seems he has been second choice throughout and he certainly has been shabbily treated, In the four tests he played against Pakistan and Australia he did not let anyone down. And they dropped him. Ian Healy called his keeping 'peerless'.
Nixon has been given a superb opportunity based on a motor mouth perfomance so far. He repeatedly failed with the bat when asked and his 49 hardly mattered - indeed he was repeatedl;y dropped by butter fingered fielders. His keeping is not up to Read's standard either. But sure he does motivate but why does that make such a difference? What does it tell us about the psychological profile of the other cricketers in the team. And there is a saying in cricket, what goes round comes round. The mouthing behind the wicket could cost England one day. He was busy talking when he dropped Fleming standing up by the way. Read is a completely different keeper.
As for the other selections there are few surprises. An over reliance on semi crocked or recovering cricketers ius a dubious stragety. I am pleased Bopara will have a chance to impress.
I would rather too Plunkett and Mahmoud be left to carry the attack should Lewis and/ or Anderson recover. They are in possession and the others should be back up choices.
But I probably would have selected Loye instead of Vaughan. For me Vaughan's brittleness is more important than his captaincvy skills. There was evidence in the recent series that the players have learned to respond to Flintoff's one day captaincy. And now he has a keeper who will nag him to distraction he will not be short of advice.
Complain about this postThe Loye ommission is a total disgrace and if I was him then I would feel totally gutted!
Complain about this postHaving displayed a better than average performance against the top team in the world over the past few weeks he should have been a certainty for the WC squad and for him to be dropped in favour of Bopara is the wrong decision by Graveney.
Why on earth we need another utility player is beyond me when we seem to be unable to generate more than 250 runs in an innings at the moment. Surely this calls for more top line batsmen to be included in the squad?
Also when you take a look at the lineup it starts to become clear that we have got an excess of bowlers.
Panesar, Lewis, Mahmood, Anderson, Plunkett, Dalrymple, Flintoff, Pietersen, Collingwood and Vaughan are all able to bowl at the highest level. Is 10 bowlers a bit silly when the one day game is all about getting big runs and trying to restrict runs when in the field?
This squad might have been handy at the start of the Ashes. England might have won a game!
How do cricketers become injured so often - their sport is so docile!
Complain about this postDefinately worth the gamble in my book. Cricket is as much a mental game as a physical one and with Vaughan back as captain, it poses a serious psychological threat to the opposition as well as giving the team a good sense of morale.
Complain about this postVaughan should be captain, He is the only person at the moment who can captain England and get the best out of every player. You only have to look at what a better side England are with him on the Field. Also this will hopefully free Flintoff up and enable him to start batting like we know he can, and bring plenty of partnerships with Pieterson which can knock any bowling attack out of the game. But why pick Nixon ahead of Read? Nixon has averaged 14 runs in the games he has played, Read could have done better if he had been given the chance. England should be showing the same faith in him as they did with Jones.
Complain about this postThe column reads fair enough to me, however, the cricket section of the sports page has a section on 5 England players to watch: Vaughan, Pietersen, Flintoff, Panesar & Dalyrmple. Fair enough, no-one would argue with Pieterson & Freddy, however, how can Collingwood not be in that list: arguably one of the best fielders currently playing international cricket, not to mention a stallwart batsmen & a handy bowler. I'll eat my shoes if Dalyrmple is more effective than Collingwood in the World Cup!
Complain about this postMichael
As an Irish man you disappoint me with your question on Ed Joyce. Were Ed to play for Ireland and not qualify for England he would never have had the experience of Australia and hopefullt go on to play test cricket.
There are only severral Test playing nations (10 I think) who play cricket and Ireland are not one of them, so there is no point in him staying with Ireland. The same will happen with Eoin Morgan currently playing for Ireland and Middlesex. He is being tipped to represent England down the road.
WC squad - suprised about Loye not been included but we all new that Vaughan was always going to be in
Complain about this postI would have liked to have seen Stuart Broad get in the squad ahead of Lewis, who was excellent for Leicestershire in the 20/20 and Pro 40 games I saw last season.
Like everybody, I want to see Vaughan lead the team in the Caribbean but it is still a gamble and one which could prove costly.
The team needs stability and with question marks hanging over several key players going into the World Cup, are we shooting ourselves in the foot with our squad selection again?
Complain about this postIt's a funny old game, isn't it? But for England's miraculous revival Down Under, there would no doubt have been widescale changes to the World Cup squad. I don't want to detract from a truly remarkable comeback but the selectors have, once again, been short-sighted. For all his tactical nous, Vaughan is short of time in the middle, short of form and has no chance of being 100 per cent fit by March. Mal Loye can only improve on what he has shown so far and should have been included. And can someone explain why Paul Nixon has suddenly become England's wicket-keeping saviour? I know he is a whole-hearted cricketer who lifts morale but he fared no better with the bat than his predecessors and Matthew Prior is undoubtedly his superior in the one-day game. His inclusion would have significantly strengthened the batting line-up.
Complain about this postIt's interesting how the debate that raged around Geraint Jones and Chris Read was down to the relative merits of their batting, when Nixon clearly has been selected on his energy and passion and no mention of his batting, or lack of it. Saying that, it's a great choice and I think Nixon behind the stumps will be a big positive at the World Cup and not just for the benefit to the young bowlers of his experience!
Complain about this postNixon was always going to get the keepers birth because he appears to be in the gang. Read is so far down the order it’s untrue. A case of anybody but! OK, his average is not great, but then is Nixon’s? Take away that 49 and what do you have? Oh, lower than Read!
I agree with the other comments, Read will probably never get a game for England again; I’d seriously consider chucking it in if I were him. Absolute disgrace the way he’s been treated.
Complain about this postVaughan as captain was a must. Since the 2005 Ashes he has become an important figurehead for English cricket in a similar way that Brearley did in the eighties - and Vaughan is a much better batsman than Brearley was.
Mal Loye can consider himself unlucky to have missed out but with only 15 places available you have to weigh up the options and Loye's chances of playing would have rested with 2 injuries to batsmen. Having said that he must be at least 50/50 to replace Vaughan if he's not fit anyway.....
Bopara can be a second replacement batsman as well as offering a fifth bowler place, offering like for like cover (albeit not as experienced) for Flintoff, Collingwood and Dalrymple thus offering England the chance to keep the same team shape in the even of injury which can be important in one-day cricket. Plus Bopara is a much better fielding option than Loye. Don't forget how important the 12th man is in modern day cricket! I suspect we'll see a lot of Bopara on the pitch during the World Cup even if he doesn't start a match!!!
Complain about this postMichael vaughan is the best captain in the world today.I also admire michael vaughan as a capatin and a player. England can win the world cup 2007.I stay in India and I am suporting england now.Indian cricket board has not picked a gerat player like v.v.s Laxman an I don't think there is any chance for them to reach the semi finals.England has picked the best players of the team.Michael vaughan should play in the world cup.
Complain about this postEngland have shown that they can beat the best in the world without Vaughan as captain. As a player he would probably not be selected for any of the top 1 day international sides - his average and absence of any form should dictate that. Throw in his fitness doubts and you have to wonder why he is taking Mal Loye's place. I am a Lancastrian and I know what Loye can do as an opener. We have to get off to a flyer in the power plays - I cannot see Vaughan doing that. I appreciate that Bopara played well in his one match - bowled a few overs and sacrificed Dalrymple to avoid a debut duck - but as the aim is to win the World Cup this year we should take experienced one day players only. Boprara will get his chance next time.
Complain about this postI believe the squad over all was pretty much as expected - perhaps Bopara being the inclusion from "left field" - not necessarily a wrong choice though, as those who have seen a lot of this guy say he has a lot to bring to the table - both in terms of character, and as a "multi dimensional" utility player.
I can completely understand why Michael Vaughan has been included - particularly as Official captain. As a tactician and motivator of the players around him, it could be argued he is the best in the world at present.
It would - to my mind - be false to suggest that Flintoff is in the same league in captaincy terms (though indispensible as a tem member), and the CB series - welcome as it is to England fans - win really isn't the greatest of benchmarks, with - in particular - Australia self destructing, and New Zealand typically hit and miss. Just look at the difference Vaughans' presence made before he got injured again!!. England looked - from a psychological stand point - a totally different unit to the one that started out.
One issue I would have if i were an England fan, is the lack of cover for Paul Nixon in the specialist area of keeper. Should he go down in a heap, then the apparent replacements are Joyce or Strauss according to D. Graveney. This was based - according to Graveney on the notion that either one could deputise for one match. I am doubtful whether having a relative novice - even for a single match is sensible. In the World Cup, one match may be enough to see the team go out. What hapens, however, if Nixon receives an injury that ends his participation in the tournament - should England progress??. As I understand it they could draft someone in, but if the first choice player were to subsequantly recover, then he could not return??. Maybe someone could tell me if that is correct or not!!.
My initial thoughts were that a place should be found for Stuart Broad in the squad - I wouldn't necessarily disagree - however - with those that would say he hasn't had enough matches, and his time will come. Had it been a straight choice between Broad and Mahmood, however, then Broad it would have to have been for me. I do not see Saj Mahmood as being of International class.
Complain about this postI was disappointed at Vaughan's inclusion let alone appointment as captain of the England team. He has yet to prove that he is match fit and surely the length of time he has been out of cricket must cast doubts on his rehabilitation at the highest levels.
Shortsightedness by the selectors might cost us dear at the World Cup.
I would have liked another batter chosen and Strauss as captain.
Complain about this postTo put it simply, Vaughan had to go if fit.
Ravi Bopara has a long way to go before he justifies a place either as a batsman or (more laughably) as a bowler. Presumably he is going as backup for Dalrymple as a distinctly average bit-of-both cricketer.
Mal Loye can count himself very unlucky indeed not to find himself included in the place of one of these two. A specialist batsman (and another spinner) is what is required given Bell and Pietersen can both fill in some overs if required.
Nixon was clear choice for the 'keepers position, as DF has discarded Jones (for being generally rubbish) and Read (who despite being the best at the job, seems to have nothing about him), and seems to have forgotten all about Jamie Foster.
The area that continues to worry me is still the bowling, which looks very thin, and our batsmen just don't look capable of chasing down 300 plus every game. My money is already down on England conceding the most wides.
Complain about this postwhy not let the captain of the c& g trophy winners captain the side, he must have something about him.
Complain about this postI think the make-up of the squad looks good. Bopara had to be chosen over Loye as he is able to cover both the bowling and batting departments whilst also being an able fielder.
The decision to take Vaughan is also one that cannot be disputed. His effect in the dressing room should not be underestimated and he is the best captain by far therefore he has to play (anyone remember Mike Brearley?). This also eases the pressure on Flintoff and enables him to concentrate solely on his bowling.
My team for the first match of the tournament (barring injuries etc) would read:
Joyce
Complain about this postVaughan
Bell
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Nixon
Dalrymple
Lewis
Anderson
Panesar
If they were thinking this seriously about Bopara, why on earth didn't they pick him in the last CB game ? Did he reverse-swing the drinks tray ?
Complain about this postIve just returned from OZ where I watched most of the one day matches on TV. Really don't like Nixon's objectional style of sledging and backchat all the time when wicketkeeping. It seems to me lacking in sportsmanship. He has an unfortunate manner. Contrast that with most of the other players of all teams who displayed friendly competitive spirit and sportsmanship in the true tradition of Cricket.
Complain about this postI really enjoyed watching so many matches in Australia and wish that Cricket could have maintained the higher profile that it had in the UK when the Ashes were played here. It is rare to find anything in the Media about important matches that take place abroad at all.
since when has aggers cared about one-day cricket?
Complain about this postAgnew is right. Vaughan's fitness and form do not warrant his inclusion in the team. He needs to prove himself in both respects by playing a lot more county cricket and scoring runs.
Complain about this postJon:
I'm not sure why there is the fuss about Mal Loye. He really only came off twice in the CB Series and neither time did he reach 50. He does add some urgency at the top of the order but, like with Shadid Afridi, fast scoring needs to continue for more than 15 or 20 balls to make a it a match-winning contribution.
On Michael Vaughan, I understand why he has been picked. He is still the official skipper until he resigns. If the medical staff are confident that he can get through the full tour, yes, he has to be picked. If he will only play a few games, for heavens sake don't pick him.
On the other issue, I guess that you never played under Mike Brearley. He averaged about 22 in Tests for England and never even looked like getting a century. But his impact on the side as a captain was so immense that he had to be picked. In fact, his place in the side was rarely questioned and England's winning record at that time was such that the side was clearly able to carry a passenger. Michael Vaughan has had much the same impact on the England side. He came in as ODI captain when Nassar Hussain retired from ODIs and made such an impact that Hussain was immediately under pressure. He took over a Test side that was being hammered out of sight by South Africa and immediately turned the series on its head. That's the sort of performance that he brings out of his players.
It's true, Andrew Flintoff was the winning captain in the CB Series and showed that he can do it. But even he has admitted that he is happier in the ranks and being Captain, slip fielder, best bowler and major middle order batsman all at the same time was a role that even Ian Botham struggled to carry off.
Complain about this postGet rid of Graveny.
Is he supporting Vaughen or England? Well me as a genuine England fan and neutral in selection, thinks Mal Loye has deserved more opportunites. Vaughen is injury prone and has done nothing in one day cricket! Period. He should not consider himself just like Mr Trescothick. But he wont because he is greedy and not doing it for the best of the team. Step up Strauss and face up to be a captain and keep Flintoff become the vice captain.
Complain about this postI disagree Aggers - most one day teams, England included, can make runs down to number 8 these days, so one dodgy hamstring risked among seven other batters surely isn't that large a gamble, bearing in mind Vaughan is England's most inspirational skipper since Brearley. It was Michael's savvy that helped bring the Ashes home and no England cricket fan needs reminding how we have fared without him. Yes his fitness and record in ODIs leave much to be desired but balance this against the immeasurable qualities he brings - his very presence seems to spur the rest of the side to greater heights. And when all is said and done, low ODI average or not, he remains on his day one of the best batsmen in the world and talented enough to produce whatever kind of innings the team needs.
Complain about this postThe grass is really greener on the other side of the fence. India, Pakistan or Sri Lankan selectors would die to have a captain like Vaughan. It does not matter if he has many centuries. We have Tendulkar to perform terribly as a captain while he is undoubtedly the best cricket player in Indian history. The same goes for Miandad. So, leaving Vaughan out is a terrible idea. I am happy that English selectors had taken the right decision.
Complain about this postThank goodness for small mercies! At least the selectors have started to experiment, and groom the young. So well done.
Nixon is an interesting choice. His annoying chatter reminds me of Warne's annoying ways/ All part of destabilizing the opposition. However, I think Read has a strong case to be there.
Why we are still debating Vaughan is beyond me. An average about 8 in the last 3 games, plus all the doubt about his fitness, makes his inclusion laughable. His performance has put undue pressure on the rest of the team.
I've always argued that Flintoff is a great cricketer, but pedestrian captain. Strauss is the man. His batting performance in Australia was influenced by some terrible umpiring decisions. He knows how to play the new ball, usually creates a good foundation, is a brilliant strategist and tactician, and oddly enough, being captain seems to improve his game, whereas it spoils Flintoff.
Complain about this postAggers
If there is doubt about ANY of the squad's fitness they shouldn't go to the tournament. I hope Vaughney makes it - but if not I would appoint KP as Captain. It won't happen, of course, but what a gesture of attack it would be!
Complain about this postIf Vaughan excels at anything, it's becoming injured.
Some people were just not made to play cricket.
Although his captaincy is excellent, the chances of him seeing it out seem remote.
Personally, I'd be looking at Strauss.
Complain about this postVaughan is the best cricket captain in the world,
every effort should be made and every door left open to make sure he plays in the World Cup.
This will remove the intense pressure on Flintoff.
If Vaughan fails to make it Strauss for captain
Complain about this posthellos. it's so OBVIOUS!
it should be
joyce
dalrymple
bell
pieterson
strauss (c)
flintoff
collingwood
davies
panesar
lewis
anderson
dalrymple is underrated in my opinion, and to my mind he has the cojones for go at the front end in the gilly role.
Complain about this postIt was collingwood not flintoff who got us through, It was Vaughan help that got us through, so YES Vaughan shoul be there.
Complain about this postYes
Complain about this postI don't agree with Jonathon Agnew's statement: "One thing must be absolutely sure: Vaughan must face the most rigorous and thorough of fitness tests at least a week before the team is due to leave. The slightest doubt, and he stays at home."
Nonsense Jonathon, our first competitive game isn't until March 16. You simply don't want him to go - hence your call for 'the most rigorous and thorough of fitness tests' a week before departure...absolute stupidity when recovering and strengthening the hamstring.
Vaughan is a wonderful captain, who will be fit, and who will score runs...he oozes quality, and only a number 11 like yourself Aggers can't see that.
Complain about this postThe announcement of England squad.
Complain about this postWhile it has revealed some interesting choices, as for example Bopara's and Nixon's, it has also raised eyebrows by the choice of Vaughan's as the captain of the team. This is queer to say the least. While he may be one of the best captains when he is physically fit, I am not sure what he is if he does not give a good account of himself either as a batsman or a bowler. Leadership is as much a matter of example as other qualities that a captain requires. Besides, as the last year or so has shown he is prone to injuries-big and small, that makes him undoubtedly someone who cannot be counted on to deliver the goods that England need. On the other hand, Flintoff has shown that he can win matches for his country. The Commonwealth Bank series was won under his leadership. When the other players like Collingwood and Pietersen are doing their part as expected, Flintoff could play as good a role as Vaughan ever did, if in addition to providing captaincy, he shines as the most economical seam bowler and a dependable batsman at no. 6.
---Sauri P. Bhattacharya
I think the selectors have got it right. Bopara can cover for many player & if it's not spinning play instead of Dalrymple. I would have taken Broad instead of Lewis or even Kirtley, why wasn't he even mentioned?
Complain about this postI think England selectors made a wrong decision by selecting Michael Vaughan as a captain and not as a batsman. Michael has no credentials, whatsoever, in one-day game and his record suggests that. He may be a good captain but he hardly inspires any of his teammates. It's a big NO NO.
Mal Loye should have been selected. His attacking batting will definitely come good on the smaller grounds in the West Indies. Only Australia might have worked him out but not the other teams. He definitely is a big YES YES.
I have never really followed Ravi Bopara. So no comments on that.
Ed Joyce - hmmm, OK.
Andrew Strauss - I think he really needs to work out his game. He is a good player but somehow he has been lacking in confidence. He is just one innings away.
James Anderson, Jon Lewis, Liam Plunkett are fine bowlers. They will get a lot of stick but England have to go with them.
Monty Panesar and Jamie Darlymple are good to go. England need variation and they provide that in abundance.
Paul Nixon should have been in the England side long time ago. Good for him, he is in the frame now.
Let's hope for the best. I will definitely put my money on England to reach the semi finals. I dont know what happens after that.
Cheers
Complain about this postkeeping Vaughan is a good idea - if only to get Mal Loye back at OT. Now if we can get a couple of replacements for Saj & Jimmy we can get straight on with winning the championship.
Complain about this postOur team's good enough except for the top 6 inches; they lack the over-the-top self confidence of the Ozzies, but that's what gets the Ozzies through time and time again. Those old enough to remember the Botham ashes series wont need reminding of what an inspirational captain can achieve. We dont need to find new players; we need to get our very good players playing well, and in Straus' case, a few decent umpiring decisions wouldn't go amiss. Vaughan's the man to do it. Australia are the main threat and they will be desparate to get their own back on us. coping with that will take a cool head and courage in the field. Freddy's achieved so much so quickly, let's not spoil him by expecting too much.
Complain about this postOkay so Loye is a 1-D player but Bopara should have replaced Strauss who is hopelessly out of form and had a lower average (19.3) than Loye in the Commonwealth Bank series. Loye's trademark sweep off the quicks would have gone down well with the Caribbean crowds.
Complain about this postContinuing the theme of fast bowlers, it does seem strange that we don't really have any out and out fast bowlers. I know Harmison has retired. But I'm not convinced we have anyone with the kind of pace needed to trouble batters on Caribbean pitches. I agree with an earlier contributor. What about Broad? Or someone else with a bid more pace?
Complain about this postI agree with previous comments from Morts.
Complain about this postLoye should have been there. If he plays the first 10 - 15 overs surely England will reach a good total.
If Vaughan is so important as captain then why not select him as 12th man and have the fielders take it in turns to come off for a couple of overs while he stays on the pitch and captains when it is their turn to field?
Complain about this postAggers was not not present at the Gabba for the match against the Kiwis.I was and my seat in the ground was such that I was able to watch in detail Vaunghan`s brilliant captaincy dispay without which we would not have won the game. Furthermore in the Finals first game Flintoff merely repeated Vaunghan`s bowling changes at the different stages of the game which proved once again successful.
Complain about this postJohn
Jonathan Agnew -Aggers Please my i just say this Michael Vaughan must be the skipper for two reasons 1) Freddie isn't Superman let the man just play and see the runs flow
Complain about this post2) Michael Vaughan has the respect of the the team(and the media) which in these days holds a lot of sway which reduces the pressure of the England boys and with him at the helm and with Colly KP Monty and Freddie firing who knows we must suprise a few people-i believe, lets just see!!
Living in Oz I got to watch a lot of the series. Loye was not impressive. He always looked like getting out. His one big shot is impressive. But he doesn't seem to be able to milk the singles to keep the scoreboard moving. The commentators here were all saying its all very fine having one big shot, but if you can't play the normal cricket shots its a waste of time. How many times did he get out taking an ugly swipe at a ball angled across him and caught behind? The Aussies and Kiwis know this. Australia somehow managed to fail to exploit it in the second final - or maybe he was beginning to learn.
Complain about this postRavi Bopara played brilliantly in his one game. Bowled a really great spell and fielded like an Australian (well like they do normally). Didn't get an opportunity to show off his batting.
Strauss was a worry, but seemed to be finding some form and scoring at a decent rate towards the end of the series. However, he seems to have got the habit of looking in good form and then getting out. Often to bad shots, even if half of them also were compounded by appalling umpiring decisions.
England do have a chance of winning, but no greater a chance than any of the other teams who are not Australia - who actually may be sliding back to the level of the rest.
Glad I am not a selector.
Vaughan definitely understands the game very well and flintoff needs to be relieved off the pressure as he performs better without the burden of captaincy. KP, colly, strauss and Bell are really a good performers, but Dont know why bopara has made it in...guess loye should have made it.
Complain about this postI think Michael Vaughan should be in the squad for the same reason I would still pick Martin johnson in a rugby world cup squad (should he wish to be selected) The rugby team has never been the same and How distant that ashes victory seems since Vaughan's injury lay off.
Complain about this postMal Loye - poor decision yet again by the selectors as he should have gone.
Complain about this postI suppose they got to stick with Nixon now but surely Jon Batty at Surrey would have been a better all round choice. He can open, is a better no 7/8 and is just as good a wicketkeeper.
I'd also have taken Broad instead of Mahmood. Would you like to see Sajid bowling against Australia in a semi-final when 10 was needed off the last over?? - no, nor would I. Broad wouldn't have bottled it in such a situation....
Whats with all this love for Mal Loye?????
Lets face it he didn't set the world alight in the CB Series and he certainly wouldn't have done any better in the WC.
Talk of him giving us the quick start we need is ridiculous, he played one decent innings in the last game but even there he was the one who was slowing the rate down not speeding it up (45 of about 70 balls meaning joyce was forced to try and up the rate and got out). The squad looks as strong as it can for me, Vaughan is a must so we can get flintoff going free from the burden of captaincy. Plus if Vaughan does get going he is one of the best batsman in the world, Mal Loye certainly isn't!!!
On another note, how come loye was even called up in the first place...what was wrong with Owais shah whose been scoring runs for the Academy squad all winter????
Complain about this postA lot of defence for Loye here - yes he is aggressive and 'different' at the top of the order but surely there's someone around the country better. In the last game I saw where he scored his best innings of 45 he didn't look like he had the technique or skill for international cricket. In fact he held the quick start up for a while missing out on at least 3 or 4 half volleys outside off stump where he turned his bat towards leg and played some sort of dodgy Village green shot - if he's the best we've got in England we've got serious problems.
Apart from that we've been so poor in One Day Cricket for a few years and looking at the experience difference between us & Australia shows how little experience most of our players have had. We need consistent selection which we haven't had for ages so sticking with the same players (barring Nixon - there's much better batting wicketkeepers around and his glovework isn't all that special) hopefully we can carry on from Australia. We are improving slowly and the side will only grow, i've not seen much of Broad but to throw him in the deep-end in a WC without much experience could be a disaster - blend him in after & build for the next one?
Complain about this postI can understand the selection of Bopara, mainly I think as cover in case something happens to Collingwood. But I'd still have liked Loye in the side, maybe at the expense of Strauss who has had a shocking winter, albeit not all his fault. The other thing with Loye is that I'm sure I've seen him keep wicket for Lancs which could be handy if Nixon gets injured.
I'm still far from convinced about Plunkett as a one-day bowler, he bowls too many wides, 4 balls and no-balls. Personally I'd have taken Chapple as a safe pair of hands in case there were injuries. We got lucky with Saj and Plunkett in Australia!
Complain about this postI could not agree more with Agnew's assessment here. What sport can you play well in when you are injured or not properly fit? Vaughan's run rate must put into question his selection? Selection should be based on current form!
Complain about this postVaughan has to go has something special as a captain and I think there is something in his batting that will one day come good in ODI
Complain about this postI feel sorry for Read is a good keeper and seems an old fashion type player and not in yer face which is why Jones and now Nixon get selected above him personally after the world cup even if we win its time for Fletcher and Graveney to move on theres too much baggage there now and a new direction is needed to win the 2009 Ashes where the best players are picked not someones mate or picked on past glories
Complain about this postYes,with Fletcher there the wicketkeeping position is still wide open but Jones and especially Eead are entitled to explanations. Read is a qiet man but are we looking for a first class keeper or a comedian who can cheer the tam and act as long stop. If we want a wicketkeeper there is not mch wrong with Prior or Foster. I have not mentioned Read who was chosen too soon and never given a proper chance. He is obviously highly intelligent and would do well to concentrate ona a career outside cricket, making do with the occasional game for a MInor County. Surely he cannot be happy trudging the country as a journeyman in the county game playing before two dogs and an old man with no hope of fulfilling his potential. A sad loss to English cricket---especially at a time when it it is all hype and little success on the field--a tin pot cup at the end of an Ashes whitewash does nothing to make me renew my county membersip
Of course Michael Vaughan should not be going. Even at his best as a batsman in 2002, he was woeful in the 2003 world cup and just about every odi he's played! He should watch Rahul Dravid for guidance as to how to build a one day innings.
Loye would have provided some oomph at the top of the order.. and once again england have fallen into the trap of a. picking injured/ out of form players, and also thinking that bits and pieces players win odi matches when it is in fact good batsmen, good bowlers, and a few that can field a bit.
It isn't exactly too difficult to figure out. When will they ever learn??
Complain about this postI can never completely agree with you Aggers! I think your view on Vaughan is completely sound. I do have considerable experience of hamstring problems, and would be very surprised if Vaughan was ready to play in time for the World Cup. He is well past the age when such injuries heal quickly. And, quite frankly, I don't think his form, after such a long layoff, justifies his selection anyway. It is hard to believe, for example, that Vaughan could get a higher ODI average than Loye whilst scoring as quickly.
But on the captaincy, oh dear! There is no way Flintoff is not going to be offered the captaincy if Vaughan is injured. It would be supremely churlish to do anything else. Personally, I hope he accepts and continues his habit of Aussie-bashing.
Complain about this postHaving been to both the one finals in Melbourne and Sydney I agree with the decision not to take Loye, he is not up to international class, he is slow about the field and running between the wickets.
Complain about this postVaughan is worth the risk, it is difficult to know what influence he has on the side - perhaps he should be made player coach! Freddie did well but having also been to the Tests in Melbourne and Sydney really think we need to relieve him of the burden of captaincy.
I applaud taking Bopara, he may not get many games but it is a forward thinking move.
Nixon was a move which has worked out well, thought his glove work and keeping was excellent in the ODIs, but this summer really should put the Jones/ Read debate to bed and if Foster is playing well why not say to him he is in for the whole summer.
I live in Singapore so miss out on the debates but bet the media are now saying England will win the world cup, I am putting my money on the Windies as they can always surprise teams and home advantage is a huge help.
Having been to both the one finals in Melbourne and Sydney I agree with the decision not to take Loye, he is not up to international class, he is slow about the field and running between the wickets.
Complain about this postVaughan is worth the risk, it is difficult to know what influence he has on the side - perhaps he should be made player coach! Freddie did well but having also been to the Tests in Melbourne and Sydney really think we need to relieve him of the burden of captaincy.
I applaud taking Bopara, he may not get many games but it is a forward thinking move.
Nixon was a move which has worked out well, thought his glove work and keeping was excellent in the ODIs, but this summer really should put the Jones/ Read debate to bed and if Foster is playing well why not say to him he is in for the whole summer.
I live in Singapore so miss out on the debates but bet the media are now saying England will win the world cup, I am putting my money on the Windies as they can always surprise teams and home advantage is a huge help.
After another trpical mistake by England's short sighted selectors Mal Loye is left at home. I 'watched' each game of this recent series and
Complain about this posthe bought definite impetus to the beginning of the innings..... his apparant attitide of 'peice of cake' loosened up up the team....the constant smile of enjoyment on his face even after that McGrath nasty 'hit' (and McGrath's slimy smile).
England need Mal's 'twinkle in the eye' as they do Nixon's audacity and enthusiasm. With the sheer excitment of Flintoff and Pietersen...this
team could go all the way. Mal will I am sure be there to enjoy the victories !!!
The argument for Loye or Bopara or the selection of Vaughan is invalid, This World Cup will be won by the team that bowls and fields best. It is a fact that this is how all games of cricket from 20/20 to Tests are won. How did Gloucestershire win six successive finals ?
We have just beaten an Australian side without Stuart Clark and Shane Warne, and their best fielder, Andrew Symonds, whilst our bowling and fielding improved dramatically on our Test performances. In any form of cricket your best bowlers are your best bowlers, which is why Panesar is now a regular in the one-day side.
If you get the bowling right, backed up by excellent fielding, which includes your most talented wicketkeeper, on recent form Read, then everything else falls into place. Remember in 2005 we won the Ashes by out-bowling the Aussies.
Dominating sides are remembered for their bowling....from Larwood and Voce through Lillee and Thomson, Roberts, Marshall, Holding and Garner to McGrath and Warne.
Duncan Fletcher may yet survive if he gets lucky and his bowling comes off, but his selections of Giles over Panesar, and Jones over Read cannot be ignored. If Geraint Jones had opted to play for Australia can you imagine him trying to keep wicket to Shane Warne ?
Can we win the World Cup ? Of course not. Who will win ? Probably Australia, but if they don't it could well be because they left Stuart Clark at home. Your best bowlers are your best bowlers.
Complain about this postCaptain and vice-captain are an issue- especially if Vaughan doesn't make it. Is there anyone outside of the current squad who might make an impact as captain? Should consideration be given to Mark Butcher or even Chris Adams.
Now Mahmood and Plunkett are in lets hope the bowling coach is just going to concentrate on line and length- with remedial classes for Flintoff. Either can lose the game with 3 wayward overs at the start. Also a big test for the captain to make sure they know what is expected in this area.
Complain about this postIf Michael Vaughan has such a positive affect on the team, but is perhaps injured and certainly not an outstanding one day player, is it not possible to have him there with the squad in some sort of advisory capacity?
He would make a fine and knowledgable drinks carrier I would say, while some time sitting in the sun on caribbean balconies ought to help his hamstring repair so he can stake his claim later in the year for a place in the test side, where, in form he would be a welcome addition to the team.
I feel an explosive batsman at the top of the order is a key ingredient, and as such Mal Loye deserves to take part.
Complain about this postPlayers to watch? the usual but where is Paul "Good old" Collingwood? he is your key man in the West Indies full stop, not much of a test player but full credit must be given for the way he fought back in the ODI's give king freddie the captains job, bat figjam at 3 [where he should be playing in tests] Bell at 4 Collingwood at 5 to steady the innings then big Fred, a full strength fit England squad will be very competitive, Vaughn good tatician he is a liability where every team member must contribute, go with the in form players England and don't forget there are other teams equally as talented playing the game, nothing is won until the fat lady sings... PS do expect a contest from those pathetic overachievers Australia.....
Complain about this postVaughan is an absolute necessity to this team. Even if he is down to one knee, he needs to be a part of England think tank. He is certainly a cut above others in terms of captaincy.
It was so easy to make out in the one day series that Freddie enjoyed the game so much when he was relieved of the leadership duties. Also, it is not always the way you play that inspires the team; you got to have a thinking head.
Regarding Mal Loye, he certainly adds a bit of impetus to the top order. But it is needless to say that he would obviously struggle against good strategic sides. He is a stereotype player with not too many shots in the armory. So to say that one would prefer vaughan over loye would be cliché
Complain about this postI fully agree with JA; is Vaughan that important to the England ODI side? His record in the short form of the game is poor and although his captaincy skills are unquestioned, now that Flintoff has finally acquired the art of winning - 4 games on the trot including 3 against Australia can't be bad - surely the time is right to make the change and look ahead. Vaughan may the the master craftsman in test cricket, but he won't be around much longer and one-day cricket is young man's, fit man's game.
Complain about this postWhat amazes me with modern day players is how they state they will be fit for this game or that tour. What has happened to the selection processs? Do selectors just rubber stamp the players wishes?.
Complain about this postVaughan is not good enough as a player to make the England world cup team. Yet he is reported to be saying he will make the the trip
well discussed the various views on squad selection,but given the expected top three, injuries permitted,who is going to score the runs quick enough to get the innings of to a flyer and make the most of the power plays,certainly not joyce,vaughan or bell. will this not put to much pressure on the middle order.
Complain about this postI completely agree Jonathan. He has been useless since he came back from injury, looked very out of sorts and contributed very little.
Why on earth we didnt go for Loye instead is beyond me... Loye is an attacking player who can get you off to a positive start, where as the likelihood is that IF Vaughan makes it to 30-40 at the top of the order - it will take 70 balls minimum.
However, Vaughan's leg would hav 2 b amputated before the selectors would consider not taking him.
The fact that Bopara is selected is yet another reason to reinforce my thoughts that the england selectors have serious mental problems. I doubt he will even get a game.
The selectors were an absolute disgrace during the ashes and it doesnt look like things will be changing anytime soon.
One last thing....the praise that Duncan Fletcher is getting is making me sick! He made some shocking shocking decisions during the Ashes, winning the One Day trophy was a very small slice of consolation for being completely trounced in the most important competition in test cricket.
Out with Fletch in with.....anyone.
Complain about this postQuite agree that MV is a great captain but his one day batting leaves a lot to be desired.
Remember in South Africa when he regularly batted so slowly that it left KP with a mountain to climb almost every time he came in to bat.
Complain about this postnot for the first time the england selectors have got it wrong!!!
mal loye has every right to feel a little sorry for himself after his exclusion from the side. just as i thought we'd at last learned from other nations about having a "pinch hitter" at the top of the order to take advantage of the powerplays, they go and drop this bombshell on us.
we've tried to play"proper" cricket in the one day format for too long and got nowhere. we finally nail it by having players who play competitive, domestic one day cricket and then this happens. the old loyalty card from fletcher and co. this backfired in the ashes by picking jones and giles.
vaughan isnt fit neither good enough to play one day internationals for his country. mal loye is hungry and exciting at the top of the order and more often than not he will get us off to a flyer.
bopara is an exciting young cricketer, but lets be serious, how many games is he actually going to play??
Complain about this postWhy suddenly all the doom and gloom?
For the first time in ages, England have managed to string together a run of excellent ODI results, and without key players.
Now that the cricket is over for a while, it's media silly season again, with bored journalists postulating about how we can mess it all up.
All this talk is totally disruptive, and baseless. 'Vaughan going home would seriouly destabilise the team'? Just like it did in the CB Trophy, where his departure was followed by us beating the world champions 3 times in a row! - Aggers you are wrong.
'Without Anderson and Lewis England's pace attack is very inexperienced'!? Inexperienced at what? Losing all the time? Flintoff has played over 100 ODIs, and Plunkett and Mahmood have been around the team for ages. Plus they've been taking wickets of world class batsmen in the last month, so why should we be concerned - unless it makes a sensationalist read. Shame on you Mr. Agnew.
The facts are that England has an improving squad with a balance of youth and experience, with world class nearly-fits who you can't leave at home.
Aggers, let's celebrate that fact and stop, for once, doom mongering for doom mongering's sake.
Complain about this postVaughan is certainly the best Test Match Captain that England can offer but surely he cannot offer more than either Flintoff or Strauss in the one day game?
Loye should have been selected. There are few batsmen in the world who can dispatch one of the world's fastest bowlers for six with a slog sweep!!!! He has proved for Lancashire over the years and Northants before as to how devastating he can be. He is capable of taking the game out of the opponents hands very quickly and the hard pitches o the Caribbean would definitely suit his style better!
Complain about this postWhen did Mal Loye become Superman? The way some of the posters on this list are talking you would have thought England had left out Pieterson or Collingwood. Loye hardly took the world by storm in Australia (one slog six sweep and out a game) and although he may be unlucky to miss out in favour of the untested Bopara, the simple fact is that England lack another top quality batsman and have not replaced Trescothick.
Complain about this postVaughan's captaincy skills are worth far more to the side - and in terms of freeing up Freddie - than the odd slog from Loye.
Craig (#99):
I agree totally with you.
36, 8, 9, 15, 29, 0, 45
was his sequence of scores. Respectable. No more. 142 runs, average 20.3. Quite a lot lower than Michael Vaughan. No catches. Strike rate 77.2, but that is not exceptional either (Michael Vaughan is 68.5) and, as Shahid Afridi has shown, a 15-ball cameo rarely wins a match.
Not sure what the fuss is about...
Complain about this postHello,
Dont you think we should trust the selectors a bit more, loads of people were say 'Collingwood is rubbish' and then look what happened or 'Flintoff cant bat' but as soon as the situation changes everyone changes their mind. The selectors have got loads of criticism (some of it justified, leaving Monty out at the beginning of the test series was silly) but they are cricket experts and know what they are doing, we should trust them.
Complain about this postI agree entirely regarding Vaughan. He shouldn't even be considered for one day cricket in my opinion.
Complain about this postI believe MV is vital for our hopes in the Wold Cup, his leadership ability shone through when we had to win against NZ at the Gabba. We should of lost that game but Vaughan's ability to apply pressure at the right time and keep cool throughout pushed England over the line. And the biggest bonus is Freddie's form has improved and he helps the other bowlers,
I thought Bopara bowled a really useful spell in Sydney, getting Hussey is no mean feat, and he fielded excellently, and kept the strike turning over dispite running out Dalrymple.
Loye does not look to have the technique to succeed, his sweep shot of the quicks is a novelty but even McGrath at his medium pace caused him trouble at the SCG when he tried to play the sweep and was hit in the face, losing his wicket next ball. The 45 off 70 deliveries at the SCG in the final was hardly getting us away to a fast start!
Plunkett looks to be an outstanding strike bowling prospect and I would keep him in the attack, a few wides is acceptable when set against the way he cleaned up Gilchrist twice with pacy inswingers for 0 and 20!
And being in the fast diminishing crowd at the SCG to witness that catch by Dalrymple was a treat, it secured the win for me!
Complain about this postI picked the English team to a man in a previous blog except for Michael Vaughan whom i considered a too risky proposition. I picked Mal Loye in his stead. As Selector Graveney said, Loye can consider himself unlucky not to be in the 15. Loye may well get in yet if Vaughan does not make it. He is potentially a match winner.
I have no quibble with Vaughan of course IF he is fit, but will he be? For a batsman of such talent he has a poor ODI record, averaging under 30. Is his captaincy worth giving up runs for? What if he breaks down again? It could conceivably cost England the Cup. I agree with Jonathan that Vaughan must be put through his paces rigorously and with no residue of sentiment; the mission is to win the World Cup and 15 fit men are going to be needed by all teams with a realistic chance to do so.
I do not understand criticism of Nixon. His chirpiness behind the stumps together with some superb keeping (were those who criticise him actually watching?) helped turn the tide for England out here along with Collingwood's heroic efforts and Plunkett's outstanding bowling. A Plunkett/Anderson opening attack could be devastating for England if conditions favour swing. Nixon earned his place. Read had his chances and, like Geraint Jones, failed to take them.
I also happen to agree about the yo-yo leadership saga. It was Flintoff - deservedly - who lead when England won the CB series. He could do it again. A couple of days ago the Sydney Morning Herald published this letter of mine about Flintoff:
Dear Editor,
Who would begrudge ‘Freddie’ Flintoff something to take home out of the wreckage of his team’s tour of Australia? Battered and beaten throughout, he kept encouraging his young team, bowled heroically, never sought refuge in excuses, showed how to lose with grace and was unfailing in his courteous sportsmanship.
Ron Sinclair
He had a tough time here in Australia and came up smelling roses in the end. He was growing into the leadership. If Vaughan has trouble with his fitness Freddie will be ready!
Complain about this postEverybody was quick enough to slam into Flintoff when things weren't going well. Now we're outraged he's not captain, or designated vice captain? Give me a break. Even he himself admitted he prefers playing without the burden of captaincy...
Vaughan for Captain, Strauss for VC! He did well enough last summer to earn that right!
Complain about this postEngland have a track record of taking the injured and/or wrong players (including the captain) to a World Cup. Remember Beckham ?Remember Owen ? Remember Walcot ? Remember Rooney ? .........
Complain about this postI don't see the sense in taking Vaughan or Bopara.
Complain about this postFor one, Vaughan as we know is injured and not guaranteed to be fully fit, plus the fact that he is not a very good one day player.
It doesn't matter how good a captian some people consider him, that's not the issue here.
He will never be the same player he was 2-3 years ago and i would sooner see Loye there.
As far as Bopara is concerned i just don't see the sense, Broad should have gone, or maybe even Hoggard.
I am sure Bopara will make a very good England player in the future, but i have to agree with some others on here, it's very "Theo Walcott".
I also think that David Graveney is living in cloud cookoo land with some of his decision making.
had to go with Nixon after giving him 10 games - at least not the England selection processes of old in discarding a player at the most inopurtune moment !!! I would go with Pietersen opening he may get out early a couple of times but theres no one more adapt in world cricket at hitting over field restrictions... Loye did well downunder but was a one trick pony in alot of his shots - nicking drives off his back foot didn't help him either !!! Thought Broad may have got a look in he seems to be touted as the next big thing in English bowling .. Was at the mcg last week for the first final and left with the impression that the Aussies have just been brought down a peg or two - a couple more injuries and the wheels may fall off their wagon ,,, England have important momentum as long as they continue with their focused approach and don't revert to the wayward bad old days - we shall see ... my team would be ;
1. JOYCE- great shot maker and great form too .
2. PIETERSEN - could be 100 runs on the board after 12 overs if he fires up and middle order coped well without him anyway .
3. BELL- top nurdler and speeds up run rate these days
4. VAUGHAN / STRAUSS - we need our best tactician out there
5 . COLLINGWOOD - thought he was gone a few weeks ago but back to his immovable best
6 . FLINTOFF - GO freddy .
7. DALRYMPLE / BOPARA - Bopara looked impressive in his one appearance so far and j.d can have good days too .
8. NIXON- chirp chirp chirp
9. PLUNKETT- could be a future genuine all- rounder can hit em late on good averages ..
10. MONTY - wicket taker
11. ANDERSON _ hope he's fit and on form or drop him
the future is brighter than 3 weeks ago this team with added confidence and a gameplan for every occasion has got a serious chance ???
Complain about this postthe starting team has to be :
joyce
vuaghan
bell
kp
collingwood
flintoff
bopara/dalrymple id pick bopara
nixon
plunkett
anderson
monty
if you dont agree with that then your name is probarly duncun fletcher
Complain about this postI'm amazed that the media have not commented on Glen Chapple's omission from the World Cup squad. I think Chapple is a better bowler than Lewis, Mahmood and Anderson and a better bat too. He would be the best possible number eight in the batting order as well as opening the bowling.
But what do I know? England's string of success over the last six months speaks for itself.
Complain about this postWell the World Cup players have been picked, only one surprise ! I'm sure everyone of us wishes them every success despite our own opinions on selection.
In my opinion MV should not be there, he hasn't proved himself either in form or fitness for over a year and I'd love to be able to read Flintoffs' mind ! As far as the old debate on wicket keeping, then I also feel that Chris Read has been treated shabbily by the selectors and Fletcher. Surely there is no long term future for Nixon, who failed in the ODI's in Australia. If Read had recorded only two low score innings he would have been dropped, Nixon gets 9 low scores and is considered a hero ! What planet are the selectors on ? No doubt we'll all be surprised this summer (I think not) when Geraint Jones makes another comeback !
Give Read the same chance selectors, as everyone else gets and you won't regret it. Pick him for the whole of this summer in both forms of the game and we'll then see who is the best!
Complain about this postTaking Vaughan - despite the risk of injury - is a no-brainer. He's simply the best captain in the world right now, and that fact makes him a match-winner despite his lack of form with the bat in the one day game.
Complain about this postWhat doesn't make sense is taking a host of injured players - Vaughan (hamstring), Lewis (ankle) and Anderson (back) together do not a strong team make.
No surprises, but however pointless it may be to rant on about Nixon's inclusion, it's also irresistible.
Any professional sporting team that feels it needs a lift in terms of "enthusiasm" cannot lay any claims to professionalism at all. "Enthusiasm" in this case seems to be defined as incessant chatter and calisthenics. God forbid that Nixon could earn a place based on ability! But that couldn't happen, and sure isn't happening now.
I can do the splits, sledge with the best of 'em, am a mediocre at best WK and a dreadful batsman. I'll happily be interviewed all day if needs be. My name's not Chris Read either. Seem to fit the criteria for a place on the plane to a tee then - I'm gutted that my upbeat and vociferous approach has not won me the recognition I so richly deserve...
Complain about this postDear Gilo.
Why are yoo not playing in the England team any maw, espetialy for the world cup competishun? OMG your deadly 'spin' bowling is soooo blatantly the key to open up the world cup safety lock for england's team. Espetialy when yoo use your sun glasses to help you power yore mental bowling radar. And yore scores of twenty and under would have probably been very good for getting quite big team scores. i can't believe people say nasty things about yoo being a poo cricket player with no discernable or defining ability. i used to like watching you fielding with the team because you were different from the other players - not boring and agile and athletic like proper sportsmen. i like the way you run like a very modern machine and always look a bit out of breath. And even maw reason for yoo to be in the team is yoo were friends with all the captain and the senior players and the manager and made injokes so were good for team spirit so i'm sure they will not be so good a team without yoo.
Lots of love,
Timmy x (8)
Complain about this postI can't believe James Foster barely gets mentioned for selection. He is a far better batsman and wicketkeeper than Nixon. I have to admit he's not as loud but does anyone think that will win us the World Cup.
Complain about this postVaughan is extremely lucky to be going, he isn't fully fit and he is struggling for any sort of form. How Strauss has managed to get selected is another mystery - the victim of some poor decisions but not in the greatest form and doesn't score quick enough.
The England one day players have regrouped so superbly that they indeed look like a team that won the Commonwealth Bank Trophy following ashes whitewash.They are more or less the same players who lost ashes 5-0,simply because they never jelled as a team.Its the team that is important and not one or two players of that group who may excel in certain abilities like batting, bowling,fielding or captaincy. Although Vaughan has great leadership acumen his fitness is suspect and could have been dispensed with more so because Flintoff is capable captain under whose leadership England won the Commonwealth Bank Trophy.England are a dark horse in the Cricket World in March '07
Complain about this postbajarkar
There is always going to be debate on selection. Vaughan is a great captain and I don't agree that it will be terribly destabilizing if he has to be sent home early. His coming and going in Australia didn't seem to harm the squad and I believe that his presence actually helped. Perhaps an on and off presence will be a good learning and transition period for Flintoff who may have been at the helm for the Commonwealth Bank Trophy but we shouldn't forget his dismal performance prior to that. Vaughan is not a gamble he is the England captain.
Complain about this postIn the main, I don't feel able to comment on the composition of the team. I think the Selectors are better qualified than I. However, on the question of the captaincy I feel on surer ground, where evidence and common sense can be used.
Recently, in his column for a Sunday newspaper, Mike Atherton wrote that Vaughan had been the prime mover for the early tournament caution in the power plays but then went on to write that he was SURE that had MV not been captain England would not have won against New Zealand. How on earth can anyone be "sure" about that? Particularly, when England went on to beat Australia (possibly a better team than New Zealand?) without him.
It has been asserted that MV is "the best captain in the world at present": evidence please. In tests prior to 2005 he was learning and appeared to show that he was an improving captain but at that stage, in my view, there was no significant difference between him and Hussain or Stewart or Atherton. In 2005, thanks largely to Duncan Fletcher, everything seemed to come together: England had its most settled team for years (I believe only one change throughout the series) and, also, its best bowling attack. Whilst none of the front line bowlers could be said to be better than Warne and McGrath they were certainly better than the rest of the Astralian bowling line-up.
As for the recent Ashes "debacle"; in an attempt to put it into context what about this for a scenario? England with no injury problems for the previous 16 months arrive in Australia with the full 2005 team. Poor Australia, so unlucky, due to injuries McGrath, Ponting and Hayden will take no part in the series and Warne will only play in two matches; Gilchrist has gone off the boil with the bat and he is beginning to put down the odd catch behind the stumps and Lee is bowling below par. Given that picture, does anyone honestly believe that, with either Stauss or Flintoff as captain, England would not have retained the Ashes?
So, by all means let Vaughan be the captain for the ODIs but only if it can be demonstrated that he will perform adequately with the bat. Because, I cannot see that he is so far above the other contenders in captaincy quality that he is worth his place for that alone.
Complain about this postWhat to Simon Jones
Complain about this postIt's good to see Bopara in the 15 for the world cup after having made a minor breakthrough in Australia thanks to KPs injury.
Bopara played an important part with both bat and ball at various times in Essexs back to back one day championship successes, so to say he has no experience is slightly off base. Indeed he could well reprise the Gooch role in the future batting up the order and scoring runs - albeit in a slightly different style - and taking important wickets at crucial times.
Complain about this postthe fact that LOYE did not make the squad is an insult to his cricket ability.he would be a better bet than bopara or dalrymple as he made runs in australia and at a rapid rate.vaughn is not fit and strauss is out of form ,which makes this even more strange.other than that i think the squad picked its self.
Complain about this postA fit Vaughan is clearly a bonus to the team, and as you say if they give him a thorough workout before the flight to assess his fitness, if he's not up to it Loye is waiting in the wings.
Complain about this postNixon's inclusion completely baffles me, Read is a better keeper and he has a much superior 1 day international batting average, Nixon only played one decent innings throughout the recent series yet he still managed to to retain his place, so the argument that he is in there for his batting is completely misplaced, OK he shouts a bit, so what? Someone in the selection crew has someting against Read there is not a decent argument as to why he should not be in the team.
Vaughan or no Vaughan, England have no chance of reaching the semi finals of the World Cup. South Africa is the team to watch out for. England will have a decent showing but i do not think any one expects them to make the semi's. It would be a big upset of England make it to the Semi's. This is a competetion between South Africa and Australia. (maybe India)
Complain about this postI dont think its a good decision to select injured Vaughan fully knowing he has played very little cricket for the past one year or so. He can not use worldcup matches as practice matches to regain his fitness and form. I dont think Vaughan is that important player for England for which they have to select him even if he is not fit. I wish good luck to Vaughan but dont want England to pay for the mistakes again as they did for Ashes selection,
Complain about this postIt has taken a 5/0 whitewash and a few bad early oneday games for England to realize they can now play without Vaughan.There was a period where if there was no Vaughan there was no team.I think that has all changed now and I feel Vaughan has to earn his place back in the England squad.He should not be considered a straight out walk in when he finally does become fit.
Complain about this postWho's Theo Walcott?
Complain about this postVaughan`s ODI record is woeful. Compared to Ricky Pontings 22 ODI 100`s he is obviously in another completley different class. You need to pick the best 11 on their talent and Vaughan is not in this group. Besides with FIGJAM coming back into the middle order there are plenty runs to be scored.
Complain about this postIt's good to see that we have so many posters who have more ability than Giles or Bopara, are wiser than the selectors and captain better than Michael Vaughan or Andrew Flintoff.
With such solid support from the fans how can we fail to win the World Cup?
Complain about this postIt's good to see that we have so many posters who have more ability than Giles or Bopara, are wiser than the selectors and captain better than Michael Vaughan or Andrew Flintoff.
With such solid support from the fans how can we fail to win the World Cup?
Complain about this postIt's no coincidence that the, on field, presence of Michael Vaughan led to England's recent one day success.
Despite Freddy taking the reigns for the final, the team was still unquestionably Vaughan's.
I'm afraid we have to start facing facts and acknowledge that Freddy is not a very good captain and worse than that he is not a respected captain. A hugely admired and reverred performer, but, not a captain. He's also had enough time to prove otherwise.
Until England have quality throughout the side that makes the issue of captaincy irrelevant (let's be honest a cardboard cutout could have won the ashes for the Aussies this winter), we have to go with a man who gets the best out of the players and that's Vaughan, even with a walking stick.
Nixon's inclusion is completely in keeping with Fletcher. He offers something to the team apart from his glovework, he gives England an unpleasant edge, which we need. Of course he has no long term international future, but, that can be debated after the one off, we're not building for the future hear, we're searching for immediate results.
It's a shame about Read, but, his face just doesn't fit. The Aussies had the same dilema with Tim Zoehrer/Wayne Phillips against the less talented, but, more combative Ian Healy and look what happened there.
And what's Gooch talking about with Bopara being a big match player? What 20 not out and 2 for 45. We have a bits and pieces player in Dalrymple who has distinguished himself in all three disciplines. They should have taken another specialist bat. I'd have gone for Oais Shah, but, I don't think he ticks Fletcher's boxes (a bit overweight and daft).
Apart from that the selection is very good.
Vaughan - mystic captain
Strauss - Going to get a big one any moment
Joyce - touch of class
Bell - technically reliable
Pieterson - un-english match winner
Collingwood - english match winner
Dalrymple - useful contributer with all three disciplines
Freddy - a world cup winner if he can forget about the captaincy
Bopara - 'big match player'?
Nixon - chief sledger
Lewis - steady swinger
Plunkett
} unsteady swingers
Anderson
Monty - consistently class act
Saj Mahmood - Style could suit caribbean tracks
Well done Fletcher/Vaughan
Complain about this postVaughan should be in the squad. by all means dont overplay him, but his presence in the squad is good as a motivator and tactician.
someone mentioned semis or finals - I hadnt realised we'd swung that far! I'll be happy if we try, and do well. we should see off the canadas and kenyas of the cricketing world, and we've already proven we can beat New Zealand on our day. so qualification and a decent effort after that, and who knows ? but lets not fall into the no-shades-of-grey-inbetween like we do with the national football side ! we'll do well, with the right captain.
Complain about this postHi,
All the hype from various cricket writers afte England's Oz risorgimento, full of cliched crescendo, is perhaps worthy of another cliche "... one small migatory swallow does not .... etc." If one looks at England's top five, say against India's, even South Africa's, they are to be found wanting in terms of average (Pietersen apart and he was South African!) technique and charisma. Bell is promising, but Vaughan, to me at least, can hardly warrant a spot, good captain or not. We are not discussing Stuart Surridge and the all-time great Surray era. Surridge could not bat, or bow (he was a great fielder), but he was able to gel the vast array of talent at his disposal ... and was probably the only ma it would listen to. Vaughan does not have sufficent talent to be merely a pawn. He MUST produce; one slip and "it's farewell de luverly islands mon." Might as well bring back Hick before he mummifies!?
Complain about this posti'm afraid i agree with aggers too - pick your best fit players. vaughn should not even have been considered.
also, we've all seen what a difference it has made when flintoff has had the time and space to focus on his (already crucial) twin roles without the additional team responsibilities.
this summer, if vaughn isn't there it really has to be strauss - not that this is would be bad thing in any way. trescothick isn't worth the risk.
and not that it means anything, but i genuinely believe it would've been better for england if strauss had been captain all winter. flintoff did ok, but it just didn't work - his man management leaves alot to be desired (cf. mahmood)
and to add my penny's worth. my world cup one day team would be:
joyce - to bat the innings
dalrymple - to attack the new ball
kp - to play natural game
strauss - to play natural game
bell - to keep nurdling!
flintoff - no more late cuts! smack it!
collingwood - to be there at the end
nixon - yadda yadda yackety schmackety
plunkett - line and length
panesar - control and variation
anderson - aggression and movement
i expect england to do ok in the world cup, but south africa are looking extremely good and will be very hard to beat.
come on england! i think the beeb bloggers are right about dalrymple, by the way. i reckon he could be one to make an impact. at very least he's prodigiously gifted and has some guts - a nice combo to have in a "bit part player". he just needs to control that fiery temperament of his.
Complain about this postIf there is any doubt about any member of the teams fitness they should not go to the world cupt. We should learn from our mistakes in Australia. And especially any doubts about Vaughan, he should not go. It is too unsettling for the team chopping and changing and hoping!
Complain about this postNixon should go because of his positive attitude and the back chat!!!!
I still think England does not stand a chance to qualify for semis in world--cup.Almost every team in world cricket today has batsman who can fire anytime and are aggressive at the top.Aussies have Gili and symonds in middle order,Sri lanka hav likes of sanath jayasurya,Pakistan hav Shahid afridi,India has Tendulkar--ganguly--dhoni--sehwag,west indies hav gayle,lara.
Complain about this postEngland shd hav included mal loye,coz he is the only opening batsman who can score quickly.Peterson and flintoof can fire but in middle order.But imagine wot if england r chasing 270+ score..can likes of strauss--bell--MV fire..the answer is no--never.....AND i m wondering wot the hell has happende to treskothik...he was a gem of player.......
England has been a good test team under Nassir and MV leadership.But i doubt there One day approach.They dont have kind of players who can win matchs.The likes of kevin and Feddie cant always win u matches.Except these 2 every other batsman in english side has a strike rate of less than 75.Which is strange.Luk batsman like --
sachin-----strike rate--87
sehwag----93
dhoni---98
ganguly---78
afridi--103
gayle--80
pontin--79
gili--97
symonds--87
smith-84
kallis--78
c'mon u cant win matches if u hav batsman playin one day like a test match...No doubt talent is there...Strauss--bell--colly--MV...all talented and hav class..but r they really worth playin in one---dayers.......dont think so....
Complain about this postyes there's a loyalty for Vaughan but the selectors should base their decisions solely on playing ability which ,as you point out in Vaughan's case, his recent scores don't qualify him plus he's had little match practice.
Complain about this postGraveney was saying that he'd be talking to Flintoff 'as a friend' when asked who was going to captain the world cup team- again muddying the line between playing ability and other issues.
Francis Byrne - you're wrong. Playing ability on its own does not a captain make, c.f. Ricky Ponting. Fantastic batsman, not a great captain and particularly not under pressure.
Vaughan - well, what can one say about his batting given that he's hobbling around here there and everywhere. but, my god, what a captain! His management of the match against the kiwis was impeccable, he took calculated risks which paid off, particularly bringing back a tail between legs Plunkett whose confidence was thus totally restored - and look at Plunkett since that match!
Vaughan is second to none strategy-wise and I think they should take the gamble. At the end of the day our one=day record is pretty grim so what is there to lose? Not a lot, but there's a huge amount to win. Freddie Flintoff is terrific and has been utterly heroic in the circumstances of the Ashes tour and its aftermath, but should not be a long-term captain prospect, and David Graveney obviously recognises that given his current circumspection.
So give Vaughan a whirl and if not him, then call up Straussy whose form will definitely improve.
Complain about this postwhat is wrong with sussex players. they must have done something reight. maybe the captain instills in them the will to win that is what we want in the england team not excuses not fit
Complain about this postMuch as I respect him, Vaughan does not warrant a place fully fit let alone injured. Why is the England management continually so utterly naive? We deserve better.
Complain about this postDont underestimate the role of the captain in a cricket team and vaughan is clearly the best captain in the world, it would be ridiculous not to pick him if there was a chance that he could play
I cant understand the loye decision - this is a guy that could score a hundred off 60 balls and win u a match, but no england would prefer to go for a player that can do a little bit of everything but is not going to win u a game - bopara.
Complain about this postThe England Team goes into the world cup high
Complain about this poston confidence after a well merited victory in the
recently concluded one day series in Australia.
Why do anything that would effect this confidence,
I agree with Jonathan Agnew that only a fully
fit Vaughan should make it to the world cup.
I am looking forward to the exciting fast bowling
trio of Flintoff, Liam Plunkett, Sajid Mahmood to
take England to the semi finals in the first stage.
I find it difficult to understand why there is such a great debate about Loye and Bopara. In my opinion they should both travel - i've been watching Loye for the past couple of years and the momentum he injects into an innings surely compensates what he lacks in terms of technique. As for Bopara he is definitely one for the future and an exciting prospect. In my opinion Dalrymple should be the one to miss out - he is the most average player in world cricket and hardly effects any match (...and I say this as an avid Middlesex fan) In addition, I don't feel that Vaughan has ever been a good enough one day player for England - if he wasn't captain I doubt he'd even be in the frame for the squad, so I hardly think the selectors can justify taking a risk on him. I'd really like to see the inclusion of Stuart Broad in his place, with Loye providing the extra batting cover.
Complain about this postIf we our top three is Strauss, Vaughan and Bell then we place too much pressure on Pietersen and Flintoff to up the run rate later in the innings. While Loye's approach won't come off every time, I think we need to adopt an offensive attitude. With Vaughan, Strauss and Bell in the top three we're hardly going to scare Bangladesh, let alone the top sides in the world. They're all great technically but simply don't attack enough and without Trescothick, we need some pace at the start of the innings. I think England can only play 2 out of the Bell, Vaughan and Strauss and with Bell's recent form assuring him of his place it looks like a straight toss up between Strauss and Vaughan. With Strauss' recent form hardly setting the world alight, he needs to be wary about his position in the side.
For me the England team should be (in batting order)
Loye
Strauss
Bell
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff(c)
Nixon (*)
Mahmood
Plunkett
Broad
Panesar
I could not agree more about Vaughan and the bowlers.
But I believe one player has been overlooked and deserves to be included, that man is Alastair Cook. He is a marvellous stroke player and has a cool head under pressure. He is a big part of England's future and deserves the chance to prove himself on cricket's biggest stage.
Complain about this postSo, MV has had/is having a thorough workout and proving his fitness is he? Hmmm...a bit like he did twice this winter only to last one match both times? And also a bit like poor Trescothick did, and of course the great Ashley Giles?
How can we have any faith in the ECB's medical team after those recent calamaties? Let's face it, it has zero to do with fitness, and everything to do with the Fletcher-driven clique that seems to determine any and every move England make just lately, typified by the ever-mystifying exclusion of Read from any and everything at any and every opportunity. Just consider, here is the undisputed best wicketkeeper probably in world cricket, who was reluctantly and belatedly brought in to the team last summer for his batting and scored a shedfull of runs; then got dropped for his batting as soon as the jumbo touched down in Aus n Fletch could restore 'his' man without censure from the selectors; then, again, when Fletch's prodigy GOJ continued to fail, poor Read was ever-so-grudgingly brought back (presumably Giles was asked first) and asked to perform miracles under ridiculous pressure (as it happens he stumped impeccably and batted better than Strauss and the tail in a shambolic team). Then what happens, Fletcher in a desperate effort to kick Read squarely in the nuts once again, rushes over an old bald never-was and promptly gives him the gloves, and continues to pick him despite repeated failure. Nixon scored double figures only once in 8 matches, and only then when he was dropped 4 times. If NZ could have been bothered to catch him out, he would have had 8 successive complete and utter failures (7 more than Read apparently is allowed). And now Nixon, on what grounds only Fletcher knows, is off to the world cup having failed to warrant selection for any of his previous 16 years in the game.
Oh, sorry, I forgot,,,he has got a big gob....so that makes it alright then....stumps OK, bats rubbish, shouts like a good 'un.
I guarantee Nixon's contribution in the WC will average less than 10 with the bat.
Complain about this postYes I agree BUT thet's face it, freddy is not inexperienced as he did captain an ashes winning side- give it a go! around him we must have 13 fully fit players- vaughn can be the one gamble. once again we are faced with a choice- do we pick potential wicket tackers or part-time bowl/batters to boost our totals, we could just outscore every one this time if the part-timers are economical enough! but we need anderson at the end(and i wish we still had tudor too!!)
Complain about this postBALANCE must be the key
Mal Loye left out once again , unbelievable , he has been a consistant scorer at county level for many years but has always been overlooked for england . Maybe his style would be worked out but a guy of his experience and talent could easily brush this aside . He adds another dimension to a team of new talent which has sadly been missing since bothams era .
Complain about this postOne day cricket's meant to be about excitement isnt it?
Complain about this postStrauss - Vaughan - Bell
Lord! my heart rate is rising rapidly!
I think Eng has a basic problem here. There players are so fixed in batting line up. They dont get any flexibility. They are still traditional in approach. Thats the issue. If Eng 50/1 in 5-6 overs, no. 3 comes Bell. You miss a trick here. Kill the opposition there with Flintoff or KP. Will that happen ? No flexibility.
If you fail on top, no option to replace opening batsmen. No flexibility.
If joyce fails on top, can he bat down the order and can Ravi bopara or KP open? Nope they never did that before.
Will Eng have guts to open balling attack with Monty to give a shocker? Nope. Hv we done it before?
Can Flintoff come one or two down and not throw the wicket but keep the run rate healthy. Nope.
KP? no. 3 ?
If Eng is 200 for 0 in 35 overs (just assume) can you send KP/flintoff one down instead of Colly or Bell. R u kidding ?
Guys shock the opposition, surprise them when you have avg team, thats the only way to win now.
Complain about this postAt my school, the inter-class cricket competition takes the form of a round-robin, 6-a-side, 6 over tournament. Any advice as to team composition/field settings?
Complain about this post