***Official*** South Africa in England

[Richard]

I didn't say he was, I was referring in general to the point of not replacing anyone who's inept at anything just because there's no obvious replacement.

While "there's no obvious replacement" is obviously a disappointing reason for keeping someone in a job, if it's a question of bad or worse, you clearly choose bad. EG, Chirac vs le Pen.

If the best man for the job is poor at it and someone who might replace him appears likely to be abysmal, you clearly keep the incumbant.

 

[GIMH]

There is perhaps a difference between "no obvious replacement" and there being nobody at all good enough, though. Agree that change for change's sake is not necessarily a good thing, but in captaincy there will usually be an option about that is good enough.

 

[Richard]

There's no-one who strikes me as someone who'd make a good job of captaincy right now.

Captaincy by nature is a job that in some cases you don't know how good someone is until you give them a chance, but you can't just go throwing captaincy at someone and hoping it works.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah, but if Vaughan is quitting of his own accord then we don't really have a choice.

Plus Strauss has won his only series as captain. And when he was captain for the series (2nd, 3rd and 4th) V Pakistan he was much more proactive then when just doing the job as stand-in (1st Tests V Pakistan & West Indies, filling in for Flintoff & Vaughan respectively)

 

[Richard]

Strauss would certainly be my choice, but it looks like the decision has already been made.

Perhaps what we wait to find-out is whether it's on a long-term or short-term basis.

 

[Uppercut]

Strauss would certainly be my choice, but it looks like the decision has already been made.

Perhaps what we wait to find-out is whether it's on a long-term or short-term basis.

Agreed, Strauss is the only real option. Averages 23 in this series though- he's hardly sure of his place himself.

 

[irfan]

Vaughan should be made permanent 12th man. That way when England bat, they will actually have someone in form with the bat @ No.3 (be it Key, Shah, Bopara etc.) and when England field, Vaughan can come on for Monty and start captaining. In the 2nd innings when you need Monty bowling, Cook/Bell can feign injury and be subbed off for Vaughan.

 

[Richard]

Never really understood how Law whatever.whatever ("a substitute shall not act as captain") works but that's the way it is.

No-one can stop someone setting fields and making bowling changes. There's no set-in-stone rules about what the captain in cricket does, apart from gets put on the scoresheet with a * next to his name.

 

[Napier16]

It was proposed in The Times by WIlde I think how he could have been a "non playing" captain for the next ashes tour or something weird.

 

[Steulen]

Strauss would certainly be my choice, but it looks like the decision has already been made.

Perhaps what we wait to find-out is whether it's on a long-term or short-term basis.

So Pietersen it is then? Sounds logical since he's roughly the only man in the team whose position is set-in-stone safe for the foreseeable future

Can't say I agree, though. The man is a bit of a tool and I haven't seen anything of him that would make him a good captain. Didn't think he was up to much in the ODI's he did so far.

 

[Goughy]

On really basic ground, one would think that KP would be in need of calming down rather than doing the calming and more in need of guidance than capable of giving it.

Just doesnt seem to be the balanced and sympathetic guy needed for the job.

 

[Uppercut]

On really basic ground, one would think that KP would be in need of calming down rather than doing the calming and more in need of guidance than capable of giving it.

Just doesnt seem to be the balanced and sympathetic guy needed for the job.

I agree, but it doesn't mean he won't be a success. A variety of personalities make good captains, from Mahela Jayawardene to Chris Gayle. In many ways, it's a gamble that England feel they have to make. Because at the moment, they're nowhere near where they want to be.

 

[GIMH]

We will get destroyed in the next Test and in the ODIs because everything is in a bit of a mess

South Africa to be the first side in as long as I can remember to come to England and win both Tests and ODIs...can't remember if Australia did it in 2001 or not?

 

[BoyBrumby]

We will get destroyed in the next Test and in the ODIs because everything is in a bit of a mess

South Africa to be the first side in as long as I can remember to come to England and win both Tests and ODIs...can't remember if Australia did it in 2001 or not?

Pissed it. Don't think we even made the final of Nat West/Texaco/Other sponsor's 3-team thingy.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

We will get destroyed in the next Test and in the ODIs because everything is in a bit of a mess

South Africa to be the first side in as long as I can remember to come to England and win both Tests and ODIs...can't remember if Australia did it in 2001 or not?

It was a Triangular series with Pakistan in 2001.........which Australia won.

 

[cpnend]

Perhaps Vaughan should replace Moores!

 

[grecian]

Perhaps Vaughan should replace Moores!

Quite a good idea actually. Yet he clearly wants to carry on batting. I'd love to see him back in full flow, great to watch.

 

[GIMH]

Pissed it. Don't think we even made the final of Nat West/Texaco/Other sponsor's 3-team thingy.

It was a Triangular series with Pakistan in 2001.........which Australia won.

Thought that would be the case. So it's been seven years since any side has done "the double" over us if you will.

 

[Richard]

And the last time before that was Australia in 1993 as well. Though in 1999 there was no home ODI series\tournament, just the World Cup and the NZ Test series.

 

[Smith108]

First post... Strauss would seem the logical option to take over, but I think Pietersen would make a better one day captain rather than a test captain.