Header Ads

Michael Vaughan - Giving Up What Is Not Rightfully His

Michael Vaughan, former captain of the English cricket team (when he had two working knees) has finally acknowledged the truth and conceded that he is a long shot to play in the Ashes series in November. However, he has revealed that he will be travelling with team to receive treatment on his knee, much like Ashley Giles at the Champions Trophy.

Question 1.

Is there such a dearth of medical and physiotherapy talent in the United Kingdom that the English team have to take their walking wounded on tours in order to pamper them with the care they need to get better? One would think that the said players can receive the same, if not better, quality of care at home. Surely recovering in familiar conditions as opposed to foreign hotel rooms in an unfamiliar country, where you are constantly on the go, is a better bet? No?

Question 2.

Who does Michael Vaughan think he is? A pretty general question, I know. However, it is necessitated by the following musing of his:
"I am the first to admit that if we go to Australia and Freddie retains the Ashes, he should keep the job," Vaughan told reporters at the Groucho Club on Monday night."
I would like to kindly remind Vaughan and his supporters that the English captaincy (or that of any other country, for that matter) is a privilege not a right. The selectors decide on the captain and bestow upon him the honour of leading his country onto the field of play.

I would also suggest that it would be utter buffoonery for the English selectors to hand back the captaincy to Vaughan if and when he returns. They have taken brave, but necessary, steps into the future by selecting Andrew Flintoff as captain and they should stick by their decision (I don't agree with their decision, but thats another post).

By his own admission, Vaughan has been out of the game for a year now. If, and it's a big if, he returns surely you cannot expect him to shoulder the duties (bordering on burdens) of the captaincy and try and get his game in order again. My views are heavily influenced by the impression that Vaughan's game deteriorated significantly whence he was handed the captaincy. Sure, he was a decent captain and formed a good partnership with Duncan Fletcher. I don't think he did anything extraordinary that Andrew Flintoff or Andrew Strauss are not capable of doing. IMHO, for the good of the English team he is better utilised as a batsman who plays his part in assisting the captain on the field.

Oh, before I forget: Michael, please remember that you are not captain any longer. You are an injured player who has to fight for his place in the national team. We love you mate, for beating the Aussies at their own game - if nothing else. But, please. Don't make such foolish comments in future. You're better than that.


Anonymous said...

Any position of power or authority is difficult to disown- many eminent leaders have failed in this context.

Lsst time too the Ashes were won more because of flintoff than Vauhan.

Ayush Trivedi said...

I like Vaughan. I think he would make a really good batsman once again if he wasn't captain. However, I don't think Flintoff is the right choice either. More on that closer to the Ashes.

Powered by Blogger.