Well, you can kiss goodbye to that Michael, my ol' lad.
Down: 2-0 (almost 3-0). Down in heart, down in style and down in class.
Under: under-performed, under the cosh and under the illusion that we could compete against the best in the world.
Out: Out of luck, out of time and out of the running.
Time to pack up and go home. Concede now Freddie. Put us all out of this dreadful misery. How can there be such a vast chasm of different between these two sides? I would actually expect lowly Bangladesh to put up more of a fight than these guys have. For me there is only one player on the field that is making any real effort and that is Monty, who, whatever the result, will come home a hero. Whereas the Management Team, the Selectors and certain others will not be welcome here. It took 20 years to regain the Ashes and this lot have given them back in a few innings. This pitch is obviously flat, quick and true. How can the Aussies bat on it and we can't?
Duncan Fletcher: YOU MUST RESIGN NOW
David Graveney: YOU AND GEOFF MILLER MUST RESIGN NOW
And when you have you will have to make a public apology to us the fans that provide the money that pays your wages and to Michael Vaughan for managing to undo all the good work of the past few years.
6 comments:
I am lost for words, deeply upset and as angry as it gets.
It staggers me that professional sportsmen accept that sort of piss take without reaction.
There is no question that Fletcher and Graveney have flushed the legacy of 2005 down the pan, but for me Flintoff has been the primary architect of this disaster.
I am close to accusing him of the unspeakable when it comes to his insistence on Giles over Panesar.
Watch his reaction to Monty's wickets - then watch how he reacts to Harmison. Trust me, he doesn't like Monty.
Couldn't he have tripped over a ball in training or something.
Oh get a grip. Fletcher and Graveney built the first well organised competetive england side in decades. They chose a side that beat the windies at home and away, beat south aftrica in south africa, and competed effectively in a sustained way England never managed in the 90s.
But apart from that what have the Romans - sorry - selectors, ever done for us?
Yes they have made mistakes,. Yes, Panesar and Read should have played. But given some of the batting performances, you shold at least be able to see Fletcher's point about a few late order runs coming in handy.
The problem is that not only are jones/giles failing to provide late order runs, but Freddie's been struggling too. Which brings me to my diagnosis of what's wrong. Too many injured players all making their comebacks simultaneously. OK, take a punt on Flintoff because he's essential to the side. But I'd have picked Dalrymple for Giles, and Tremlett for Anderson. I'm not at all clear what Plunkett's doing on the tour - I'd have gone for Onions. And Trescothick always looked a gamble too far - and it ended, literally, in tears. Rob Key should have gone, or maybe Mal Loye, if fit.
The side that won in 2005 relied a great deal on absent friends like Vaughan, Simon Jones and Tresco. Without the three of them, it all looked a bit iffy. And even though Freddie's there, he's not the Freddie of 05. He's more tentative with the ball and bang out of form with the bat.
With luck Vaughan will be back in the driving seat next summer. Freddie must be nursed. The priority must be to find a keeper who can average at least in the late 30s-early 40s in test cricket. Maybe Davis of Worcs? Mustard of Durham, if he can calm down a bit? And maybe we should think of playing one of the Yorkshire leggies in next year's tour. Raschid's supposed to be able to bat a bit.
And the best people to marshall this process are the current team. Failing that let's offer up the best England manager in living memory as a human sacrifice and bring back Bumble, so he can have hysterics after close matches. And we could have Ted Dexter as chairman of selectors. Maybe this time round he could remember some of the players' names. Or there's always Ray Illingworth. Maybe that's what we need, a chairman of selectors who thinks we need older players..... that Mike Gatting knows a thing or two about playing spin.....
Muttley...Whilst I am happy to concede that on some matters I do, indeed, need to get a grip, I feel I must raise certain points detailed in your comment.
I agree that this current England has been built on a well organised framework. My beef is that the model which once worked is now failing and therefore needs fresh input. The mistakes, in once sense are forgiveable especially given the poor run of injuries to significant team members. What I object to is the sheer bloody-mindedness of the selection team over this tour. Freddie was a must to take because he can be a true talisman (although I do not rate him as a captain). Giles was not at all match fit and why should he be included over Monty when clearly Monty was the form player and can score runs as it turns out.
I am not interested in returning to the bad old days of Bumble and Nasser and guys like that because if we are to take on the best in the world we should be equipped with the best players and staff alike.
I agree that Plunkett is the proverbial spare dick and shouldn't have gone. I would have selected Stuart Broad who has impressed me several times last season at Grace Road. Dalrymple certainly has something about him as does Tremlett. Rob Key would have been a better choice as an opener than Tressie who, let's face it, is now finished. But these issues are an aside. The real issue at stake is the Ashes and how we retain them. It will be a long night for those insomniacs amongst us who still believe that Freddie is due a decent knock and that KP should hang around to help him.
The real issues are with the management team. We won in 2005 becasue we played attacking cricket. We actually took the game to them. The selectors were very fortunate to have such a pool of fit players to draw from...and remember this pool excluded Thorpe, Key & Butcher as well as a whole list of nearly-ready's. Fletcher's management played a big part in our success in 2005 and I have raised my glass to him on many occassions. However, poor management of practice matches, ICC games and injuries has left us wanting. Someone has to take responsibility for this surely? Graveney wasn't ever a great player and nor Geoff Miller. I'd rather see a few guys that shoot from the hip and have the real knowledge of the game. Boycott (hey love him or hate him you owe him your respect!), Botham & Willis would do a better job. And if he wasn't wasted on coke I think that Dermot Reeve would get much more out of Mahmood, Harmison and even wet boy Plunkett.
I am not looking for the bad old days to return but it is a time for change...or do we perservere for another 20 years to get the urn back?
I think what you're saying is that we mostly agree - the original selection was flawed. And Fletcher was a bit inflexible.
But just suppose Read and Panesar had been selected. I doubt it would have changed the outcome at Brisbane -- Adelaide is a bit more problematic, Panesar in the attack might have got England a bigger lead; Read might have got runs where Jones failed, or caught that Michael Clark edge behind which Jones didn't get near - perhaps. And either of those might have made the aussie assault on the final day impossible - we'll never know. But Panesar did play in Perth and we still blew it -- and I seriously doubt Read would have made much difference.
But the real difference between now and 2005 is that the Aussies have sharpened their side while England have weakened. If Mike Hussey had been playing in 05, instead of Katich, the Ashes may not have been won, in any event. Had Clarke been in their attack instead of Gillespie/Kasparowicz England would probably not have been able to get off to the kind of flying start they enjoyed at Edgebaston and elsewhere. And Ponting's form has been magnificent.
England's main problems have been the failure of all bowlers to threaten the aussie batters. Sometimes only two out of five looked even half decent. And as I said in the earlier post the basic problem was too many bowlerds half-fit after injury. Deja Vu from 2002. Plus collapse prone batting -- as seen on several occasions since 05 -- notably that game in the pakistan tour where we really should have won (was it Multan?.
I have trouble understanding this, since arguably we polayed Warne better on good days than in 2005. The Cook-Bell stand was some of England's best batting for ages.
And there is hope for the future. Bell and Cook are maturing. Peitersen has the makings of a real great. There are plenty of impressive bowlers around to pick from. More if injured heros return.
So I'm inclined to stick with the current team - who are such an improvement over what went before. Of course they make mistakes and misjudgements, that's showbiz. They should learn from them.
But please, please don't fool yourself that great former players automatically make great managers. It's worth pointing out that Boycott was not a successful captain of either Yorks or England, and neither Botham nor Willis enjoyed much test level success either. And anyone who thought Ray illingworth's triumphs made him a great manager should read Mike Atherton's autobiography.
Fletcher may not have been a great player, but he has won a lot of respect and affection from his players. The meeja may not like him, but he's been a class above anyone elese who's had the job. If he does go, and after the rather malicious savaging he's copped from some people, I would hardly blame him, then his successor should be someone like Bob Woolmer, not some commentary box has been with a penchant for damning anyone who played after 1970....
Here's a thought: Darren Lehman.
Hat's off to you Muttley. Darren Lehman is someone who I have long rated both on and off the field. I concede the comments on Boycott, Botham & Willis but believe they do have an eye for a good player. Bob Woolmer would be a bad move me thinks and, if I'm honest, I suspect we already have the best man for the job. He just needs his arms untied from selction particularly when on tour. There was a time when he was question about selection he used to refer the media to the chair of selectors! the current setup is strange. Perhaps if we want to be as good as Oz then we need to take on their selection style too? The what if's are hard to measure. Read may have made a difference. Monty would have probably dropped Ponting like Giles did. The measure of the side is their performance under pressure and we haven't done well. The Ashes have gone now but we can salvage some dignity. I would like to see some movement in the selection process towards public opinion. Afterall, we all wanted Monty included (you're right - he might not have made any difference in the 1st test)and he should have been.
The future of England's success will naturally lay with the players and I'm excited at Cook and Broad and Mahmood and Monty and of course KP & Freddie. We need to look at the WK slot. I always thought Foster was a class act but injury killed him off and he never got selected again. Anyway, I will await your comments of my full match review which I will upload later...
Living in Adelaide, Darren Lehmann is a living legend, bailing out a young South Australia side on many occassions. On the day before the first day of the Ashes Test, he was in the local Murdoch Rag (Adelaide is where he started), putting up his hand for the England Captaincy. I think that he would be an inspired choice. He knows all the England players, has played all over the world, knows all there is to know about the game, was nearly an Australia Selector..... I reckon he would be a great asset, given that the next real challenge is to win back the Ashes in 2009.
Post a Comment