England's new test captain

01 May 2008 11:24:38

Sadly, it looks like the media's knives are out for Michael Vaughan. I
don't know what he's done to get up their noses but for my money - he's a
shrewd tactician (probably the shrewdest we have had for many years), a good
motivator and a fine batsman. He is, however, a touch player - so far more
likely to cream 2 or 3 glorious hundreds than to top the averages thanks to
consistent scoring.

Personally, I think the (some of the) media talk a lot of rubbish - when
Flintoff got a first baller it was reported as a duck. When Vaughan got 19
and was dismissed by the highly rated Shane Bond - it was reported as a
"flop". [Both were BBC reports]

But back to the plot - if the media want Vaughan's head - whose head are
they going to call for to replace him?

Cook - still only 23 - surely too early.
Strauss - I rate him highly but a huge risk as he's only just back in the
side
Bell - captained youth sides but strikes me as a bit young and more
important spineless
Pietersen - too flamboyant IMHO
Collingwood - captain of the ODI team but IMHO nowehere near worth a test
place let alone captaincy.
Ambrose - a ridiculous idea
Sidebottom - only played 10 tests or so
Broad - only 3 testa and 21 years old
Anderson - hardly a certainty
Panesar - pretty certain of his place but Monty - England captain? I'd like
to see it one day but surely too soon.

So if they're calling for Cook, it's too early. If they're calling for
Collingwood, they want to disrupt the team because Collingwood will surely
be found out to be rubbish sooner or later. I reckon he's only just
clinging on to this ridiculous benchmark of 40 as an average. One more
poor series (as he had against India, Sri Lanka and NZ) will surely see him
exposed for what he is - a leaden footed poor starter.

So to me, it seems the media are calling for KP to captain so they can jump
on him the moment his form slips or his eccentricities split the team. It
all makes for good headlines but what a joke our media is! IMHO Vaughan
should stay leader for another couple of years - enough time for Strauss to
come good or someone else to come in and make their mark (maybe even Cook).
To replace Vaughan now with the Ashes 12 months away is asking for trouble
IMHO. Remember the total farce there was when we made another flair player
(Flintoff) captain - 5-0.

01 May 2008 19:39:12

Richard Dixon

Re: England's new test captain

"lk" <gofyself@wrong.address.com > wrote in
news:48199a5b$0$26087$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:

> Sadly, it looks like the media's knives are out for Michael Vaughan.
> I don't know what he's done to get up their noses but for my money -
> he's a shrewd tactician (probably the shrewdest we have had for many
> years), a good motivator and a fine batsman. He is, however, a touch
> player - so far more likely to cream 2 or 3 glorious hundreds than to
> top the averages thanks to consistent scoring.

Yup - which (sort of ) makes him eminently un-droppable as you never know
when a glorious innings may crop up.

> But back to the plot - if the media want Vaughan's head - whose head
> are they going to call for to replace him?

Cook will be captain in 3-4 years time, although I'm not sure he has as
much up top as Vaughan - and less steel, although he is early in his
career. I don't think Strauss has the presence, neither Bell. Collingwood
maybe and Pietersen NEVER!

I'd whip Robert Key back in - back in to form at Kent and has a good bit of
chirp about him and has proved his worth before despite a number of bad
patches. Much like Ramprakash now - he's a different person to the one who
first played and seems to thrive under the Kent captaincy.

Richard

02 May 2008 10:49:38

Re: England's new test captain

"Richard Dixon" <rdngemail@yahoo.co.uk > wrote in message
news:Xns9A91D3028B081rdngemailyahoocouk@80.5.182.99...
> "lk" <gofyself@wrong.address.com> wrote in
> news:48199a5b$0$26087$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk:
>
>> Sadly, it looks like the media's knives are out for Michael Vaughan.
>> I don't know what he's done to get up their noses but for my money -
>> he's a shrewd tactician (probably the shrewdest we have had for many
>> years), a good motivator and a fine batsman. He is, however, a touch
>> player - so far more likely to cream 2 or 3 glorious hundreds than to
>> top the averages thanks to consistent scoring.
>
> Yup - which (sort of ) makes him eminently un-droppable as you never know
> when a glorious innings may crop up.
>
>> But back to the plot - if the media want Vaughan's head - whose head
>> are they going to call for to replace him?
>
> Cook will be captain in 3-4 years time, although I'm not sure he has as
> much up top as Vaughan - and less steel, although he is early in his
> career. I don't think Strauss has the presence, neither Bell. Collingwood
> maybe and Pietersen NEVER!
>
> I'd whip Robert Key back in - back in to form at Kent and has a good bit
> of
> chirp about him and has proved his worth before despite a number of bad
> patches. Much like Ramprakash now - he's a different person to the one who
> first played and seems to thrive under the Kent captaincy.
>
Sorry but whoa oh no no no no no. He may be a better person now and may be
a good captain but Rob Key whenever I've seen him is a fat lumbering leaden
footed fool. To me, Rob Key is the new Mike Gatting and while I concede
Gatt made 100 centuries, he was bowled or lbw in over 50% of his test
innings and that is too high. Key has an unusual style, difficult to
describe but I detect an obvious flaw in his technique that he's far too
often gated for my liking. He's quite a big (i.e. fat) bloke and when he
comes forward, it's more of a lunge than a precise movement and I think it's
that balance problem that sees him move his front foot actually too far when
driving - creating the gate. Anyone who can bowl it straight and full at
Key is going to cause him problems and I personally think Dale Steyn would
eat him for breakfast as would several others.

Sorry - I mean no disrespect to your opinion but my mind has been firmly
made up about Rob Key since he last played in 2004-5 against the SAFs.
Some players can change but some can't and I've not seen anything
domestically to convince me Key is any better than Collingwood and I tell
you I absolutely abhore Collingwood. If we're going to replace any
batsman, I'd get rid of Colly straight away and bring in Shah. I suspect
the clamour to bring Fred back will see one of the batters dropped and (for
a while at least) it won't be Vaughan, it can't be Cook, Strauss made 170
odd in his last dig, KP's a certainty so it's basically a dogfight between
Bell and Collingwood. Bell is younger and, while I have my doubts about
his self confidence, I'd always back a talented player than a tough battler
with limited technique like Colly. Colly has, in my opinion, been very
lucky to play test cricket. He's made his reputation against some weak
sides (or on one occasion a good side on a flat wicket at Adelaide) and
that's why he averages 40+. Against decent opposition, he crumbles.

02 May 2008 23:00:47

Colin Reed

Re: England's new test captain

"lk" <gofyself@wrong.address.com > wrote in message
news:48199a5b$0$26087$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk...
>> Broad - only 3 testa

I bet it's uncomfortable when he wears a box!