Mr Mxyzptlk said:
1/ I was under impression that its the player's decision. :rolleyes:
2/ When would you have preferred them to expose a young 'keeper? Stewart isn't young and wasn't getting any younger. What difference would it have made when they replaced him? Now or five years from now, the new 'keeper would still need an adjustment period! It's better to do it as soon as possible IMO.
1. Stewie succumbed to press, media and "expert" pressure. Every interview he was being asked when he's going to quit. It's clear to anyone with half an ounce of wit that he did not want to quit. He was pressured into quitting.
2. Expose a new keeper when Stewie retires. Not before. Like with ANY position. Seems logical to me. I can see the management meeting: "yeah, i think we should weaken our team now, not later ... becasue then we will have a weakened team for longer" :rolleyes:
"What difference would it make" ... huh? That's silly. By that logic Ambrose and Walsh should have been replaced 10 years ago. Nonsense. If they're good enough they'll adapt quickly whenever they're picked, and wherever they play. Otherwise, we'll find someone else. You should always play your best players.
By that logic we should replace Thorpe and Hussain and Butcher now. Imagine the chaos of that middle order. Why are people not urging Thorpe to retire? He's caused more agro and problems for England than any other player. We have plenty of lesser mediocre players to replace these three. You never know, in 4 or 5 years, these new players might raise themselves from they're mediocrity and become average ... then we'd have to replace them :rolleyes:
Play your best team ... always. Stewie could have played test cricket for another 4 or 5 years. He was the fitest member of the team BAR NONE. He was more dedicated BAR NONE. He wanted to play for England more than any other player. His game is all based on timing ... and that has not deserted him one little bit.
This is pure AGEISM with Stewie. Nothing more, nothing less.
There's no way Stewart was going to be around for the WC 2007, so there was no point for him to continue to play & then retire in late 2004/early 2005 leaving England with little time to blood a new keeper.
He's done the right thing and given England 4 years now to give Read time to develop his game at the highest level.
Sorry. The new keeper should know how to catch the damn ball. You don't need 5 years to learn that!!! There is no adaption to be done, save the usual matter of getting adapted to the team and the other players ... like every player has to do ... and if he can't bat, then there's no adjustment to be made ... welcome back to county cricket mate (see Steve Rhodes).
So what Stewie doesn't make the next World Cup. Who gives a sh*t abnout One Day Cricket and the World Cup ... I don't. He'd already retired from the Mickey Mouse game anyway.
Like I said, Stewie was fit enough and enthusiastic enough to play for another 4 or 5 years. Nobody loved playing for England more than Stewie. He was the most important member of that team in terms of balancing the lineup. Now it looks chaotic.
Backward step IMHO, not a forward step.
