Vaughan resigns as England captain... so does Collingwood

[Prince EWS]

I have infinitely more faith in Vaughan the batsman than Bopara at the moment, and that's even given that I was quite in favour of being dropped. Strange stuff.

 

[pup11]

Armchair know-all critics are starting to get on my nerves.

The fact is that the selectors watch, hear and know a lot more about the form and ability of players in domestic cricket than most of the posters on this messageboard. You may be an exception, of course, but I'm in no position to make that kind of bold assumption.

English selectors have really made seriously odd decisions, i mean they axed Prior when he has doing ok with the bat, but his glovework was not upto the mark (and that has always been his problem), then they brought in Mustard, then they dropped him then they punted with Ambrose, and he did decently in his first test series, so they gave him a chance in Odi's too, but now they are going back to Prior, i mean i have no problems with selectors picking a guy out of the blue, whether he has the stats or form to justify his selection, but the important thing is when selectors pick a guy they should atleast give him a fair run before dropping him, atm the English selectors just seem to be making changes for the sake of it.

 

[pasag]

Armchair know-all critics are starting to get on my nerves.

The fact is that the selectors watch, hear and know a lot more about the form and ability of players in domestic cricket than most of the posters on this messageboard. You may be an exception, of course, but I'm in no position to make that kind of bold assumption.

People commenting on cricketing selections on a cricket forum, who would have thought?

 

[tooextracool]

With Vaughan gone, it seems incredibly likely that we may end up with almost exactly the same side that took part in the Ashes drubbing last time around. With the possible exception of Jones and Prior, the rest of the batting and bowling will be exactly the same.

 

[pup11]

I have infinitely more faith in Vaughan the batsman than Bopara at the moment, and that's even given that I was quite in favour of being dropped. Strange stuff.

I agree with this, no longer having the burden of captaincy Vaughan may play freely and fluently, which might bring out the best of him as a batsmen, he might also be determined to prove everyone that he is still a pretty good batsman, but the question is, would the selectors pick Vaughan as a batsman, now that he is no longer the captain.
Anyways Bopara just doesn't seem to have it in him to be a good test player, somebody like Shah or Key would have been much better choices.

 

[GIMH]

RE Burgey's post - awesome read. Pretty much agree with it, except maybe for Hoggard who had a poor time of it in Tests over the last 12 months or so - that being said it would have made sense to give him a shot at Headingley

 

[tooextracool]

I would have had no problems with Hoggard being picked if only because hes drawn circles around Smith in the past and heaven forbid that his experience might have made some difference to the result of the recently concluded test.

 

[pup11]

With Vaughan gone, it seems incredibly likely that we may end up with almost exactly the same side that took part in the Ashes drubbing last time around. With the possible exception of Jones and Prior, the rest of the batting and bowling will be exactly the same.

Hey..... you never know they might very well throw someone like Pattinson into the mix of things.

 

[tooextracool]

RE Burgey's post - awesome read. Pretty much agree with it, except maybe for Hoggard who had a poor time of it in Tests over the last 12 months or so - that being said it would have made sense to give him a shot at Headingley

How can Hoggard have had a poor time of it in the last 12 months when he was our best bowler in SL? He had 2 poor tests at best and that was with injury niggles and what not.

 

[pup11]

I would have had no problems with Hoggard being picked if only because hes drawn circles around Smith in the past and heaven forbid that his experience might have made some difference to the result of the recently concluded test.

AWTA!

 

[pup11]

England made a big mistake by dropping Hoggard, he has bowled so well for them over the years, he has done well in most conditions, and he has been the workhorse of the bowling line-up, i think currently there is too much workload on Fred in the bowling department, because there aren't any effective bowlers in the English line-up who can share that workload successfully with Fred, so it won't be a bad ploy to bring Hoggard back.

 

[zaremba]

People commenting on cricketing selections on a cricket forum, who would have thought?

Yeah fair point, touche

 

[Richard]

I would have liked them to throw a few more names into the hat for the last test, possibly Key, Shah or maybe even the likes of Graeme Swann or Simon Jones. By just bringing in Bopara the selectors appear to be unwilling to take a risk or two.

That can be roughly translated as "they appear unwilling to throw in lots of random names and see if one or two guesses work-out well".

Simon Jones will play again when the selectors are satisfied with his fitness. If they weren't 2 weeks ago, it's pretty unlikely they will be now. I think we can now fairly safely say that they made the decision they weren't going to pick him at all this summer, and I guess there's some sense in that. I hope he's back in the squad for the winter Tests though.

Graeme Swann for Tests, WTF? In place of MSP? Or to play alongside MSP? When was the last time one fingerspinner, never mind two, had any real notable success at The Oval? 1997, that's when - over a decade ago. And that was the first time since God-knows-when too.

Key, Shah and Bopara? In place of who exactly? One of those three is quite sufficient.

 

[Goughy]

I have infinitely more faith in Vaughan the batsman than Bopara at the moment, and that's even given that I was quite in favour of being dropped. Strange stuff.

Completely agree. An argument can be made (agree or not agree) that Vaughan is one Englands best post-war bats.

We have all know that he has issues and when he smells, he really stinks. It is no suprise he has been on a bad run, as that is what he does. However, when he is good he is great. And that is what you are risking.

The rewards of gambling on a flawed talent are far greater than going for a sub-par cricketer (which Bopara currently is. May change).

 

[Richard]

Before the second test, threads were posted about whether Flintoff should even have been picked!!!
If that situation had applied to McGrath (who was our best bowler) and Australia, there wouldn't even have been a discussion - he's the best bowler - if he's declared fit, whether he's played once in 12 months, or thirty times in 12 months he gets picked, because he's head and shoulders above your other options. As Flintoff was over others. Why there was even a discussion about it is beyond me.

TBH, the only reason the question was being asked was because we weren't sure whether he was fit. It wasn't a question of "is Flintoff a better cricketer than Stuart Broad?"

Likewise Hoggard. Now I don't get to see or read about his FC efforts this summer because I'm on the other side of the world. But if I'm barracking for SA this English summer, I'm a damn sight happier he's not there and a bloke like Broad or Anderson is. Why? Because whether he's bowling crap for his county or not, the bloke's done it at test level for a few years now and done it well. He's a proven test bowler. He's done it when it swings, he's done it when it hasn't. He's done it when it's cool and overcast, he's done it when it's hot and sunny. He's done it when it's seaming around and he's done it when it's flat as a tack, like in Adelaide.
It's all right for the selectors to opine "he's lost a yard of pace", but as far as I know he hasn't lost the respect of test batsmen, which in my mind counts for a hell of a lot more. If he got pongoed in a couple or more tests, fair enough, but surely he'd earned the right to lose his spot at the highest level.

Hoggard's domestic form this season has been juuuuuuuuust fine (unlike other Yorkshire stalwarts Gough and Kruis, or Rana Naved-ul-Hasan the import) and most people were saying he should have played at the start of the summer. However, Anderson has mostly bowled pretty decently and occasionally even outstandingly this season and regardless of the fact Hoggard should have been ahead of him, you couldn't really have dropped him at any point once the Test summer got underway. As for Broad, well, it's patent he's nothing like as good as Hoggard with the ball currently, but it's his batting that's seen him picked.

Cook, Strauss, Bell, Pietersen are hardly old. There's a future there. I still have qualms re. Cook's technique on off stump, but he's making a go of it

The outside-off issues are the least of Cook's worries currently, he's all over the shop. It says a fair bit for his shot-selection skills that even with so many technical problems he's still able to score the odd half-century and mostly get good starts.

There's a nucleus there for a decent batting line up. You need someone to come in for Vaughan (assuming he's not back). If it's a decision between some bloke who's 30-odd and averages 3 runs per innings more than a bloke who's 25, FFS pick the young bloke and stick with him for a decent period!!! The selectors have to trust their judgment - if they're not prepared to take a punt based on their looking at players at FC level, they ought not be in the job.

The trouble is, it's not. It's between a couple of 29-year-olds and a 23-year-old, with the 23-year-old having far less of a case than either of the 29-year-olds.

And yes, I do hope Vaughan can return, because I've always liked him as a batsman and still do. It is now up to him to force his way back in if the hole remains open.

 

[Goughy]

If someone looks through my posts. I dont think I have ever advocated Strauss, Collingwood or Vaughan being dropped during their bad runs.

Dips in form are what cricket is all about. Technical and mental issues creep in and are often cast aside after a period of time.

Im a firm believer in the 'best' players playing through a bad run. It doesnt help anyone when chopping and changes take place on the gamble that a lesser player may be able to perform better than a better player.

Drop players if they are finished or not produced for an eternity but never drop a player you think is in a short term bad trot as it causes nightmares.

 

[Prince EWS]

If someone looks through my posts. I dont think I have ever advocated Strauss, Collingwood or Vaughan being dropped during their bad runs.

Dips in form are what cricket is all about. Technical and mental issues creep in and are often cast aside after a period of time.

Im a firm believer in the 'best' players playing through a bad run. It doesnt help anyone when chopping and changes take place on the gamble that a lesser player may be able to perform better than a better player.

Drop players if they are finished or not produced for an eternity but never drop a player you think is in a short term bad trot as it causes nightmares.

Excellent post.

 

[NZTailender]

Excellent post.

Yeah, Goughy has basically summed up my feelings with that (excellent) post.

or

AWTA.

 

[four_or_six]

If someone looks through my posts. I dont think I have ever advocated Strauss, Collingwood or Vaughan being dropped during their bad runs.

Dips in form are what cricket is all about. Technical and mental issues creep in and are often cast aside after a period of time.

Im a firm believer in the 'best' players playing through a bad run. It doesnt help anyone when chopping and changes take place on the gamble that a lesser player may be able to perform better than a better player.

Drop players if they are finished or not produced for an eternity but never drop a player you think is in a short term bad trot as it causes nightmares.

The problem is, Vaughan is averaging 36 (34 if you remove Ban and Zim, 29 if you take WI out too) over the last 5 years (more than half of his test career) which just isn't anything like good enough as our number three batsman. It's not just a bad run.

 

[Richard]

The thing is, though, that record is not one thing. Yes, his overall average is just 34 which is poor, but his average is 29 as an opener (almost all of which comes from 3 matches, Kandy '03/04, ARG '04 and SSC '07/08) and 37 batting elsewhere (which has come down from 41 in the last 5 matches.

It's as an opener that Vaughan's big failing is. He's disappointed as a number-three\four, but nowhere near as badly as might seem the case.