Vaughan: Fredalo ruined the world cup

[Jono]

There's not going to be displeasure at your captain tonning up, and that's clearly not what I was suggesting Richard.

But Vaughan isn't this "all-loved inspirational figure" of English cricket that the team bow down to, as is sometimes suggested. He's a great tactictian, and Pietersen must adore him based on his reaction (or maybe he just wanted some man love), but I think his recent behaviour would clearly have pissed off not only Freddie, but other team mates who would be closer to Freddie than they are to Vaughan.

 

[andmark]

I actually think if Vaughan told Flintoff about that.The rest of the team would be around him telling him to stop saying it.
But if it was the other way round.The team would be around the Vaughan making him feel guilty.

 

[TT Boy]

Could have sworn it was Vaughan's inability to hit the ball of the square which ruined any chance England had. Poor form from the skipper.

 

[Richard]

There's not going to be displeasure at your captain tonning up, and that's clearly not what I was suggesting Richard.

But Vaughan isn't this "all-loved inspirational figure" of English cricket that the team bow down to, as is sometimes suggested. He's a great tactictian, and Pietersen must adore him based on his reaction (or maybe he just wanted some man love), but I think his recent behaviour would clearly have pissed off not only Freddie, but other team mates who would be closer to Freddie than they are to Vaughan.

I'm sure it would, but you know very well that the reaction to Vaughan's Headingley century was about far more than just that one game. He might not be all-loved, but he has the ability to inspire great loyalty, and the fact that someone who's generally fairly neutral (and, lest we forget, who hasn't actually played with him much) like Pietersen should be so patently ecstatic at that very-very-meaningful century IMO says quite a lot.

Not many if any dislike Andrew Flintoff - that'd be virtually impossible, he's as likeable a guy as you could wish for, really - but I think and have thought ever since it happened that that Pietersen reaction told you 1,000 stories.

 

[Shoggz]

I still think that the original article deserves a more thorough read.

The headline and the way the media are reporting this make it seem inflammatory, but if you actually read his words, he definitely says that the incident not Flintoff himself - was destabilising and created a siege mentality.

 

[Richard]

As has - sort of - been said elsewhere (by Rob-Prince EWS), it's hard to say that the incident was a bad one without criticising the person responsible for it, and that person was clearly Flintoff. I have read the article in question and while it makes it marginally better - does anyone serious think he'd hold a press-conference to say that alone? Or have a 2-minute chat with some reporter to say that alone?

 

[Scaly piscine]

I don't think most/any of us are in a position to come out with these 'poor form' comments. Flintoff might be the sort of character who responds positively to this sort of thing (from Vaughan) and needed it to get back to what he was in the 2005 Ashes series, given he appears to have regressed somewhat.

 

[Piper]

I really wanna kill Vaughan right now. His ego has to be the biggest on the planet! There were six players drinking that night, why do he have to blame Freddie? He should have left the past where it belongs.. but noooo.. I hope Freddie kicks his ass

 

[PhoenixFire]

I don't think most/any of us are in a position to come out with these 'poor form' comments. Flintoff might be the sort of character who responds positively to this sort of thing (from Vaughan) and needed it to get back to what he was in the 2005 Ashes series, given he appears to have regressed somewhat.

Word.

I doubt that Vaughan would have made those comments, had he thought that it would harm the morale of Flintoff, or the team for that matter, he isn't stupid and knows better than that.

 

[UncleTheOne]

I really wanna kill Vaughan right now. His ego has to be the biggest on the planet! There were six players drinking that night, why do he have to blame Freddie? He should have left the past where it belongs.. but noooo.. I hope Freddie kicks his ass

because this isn't the first time freddie has been in trouble for his drinking, and the fact that at 4am he thought it was a good idea to put his health in danger by going for a little ride in the sea.

 

[Barney Rubble]

This isn't going to be a popular view, but I'm behind Vaughan in this.

As the captain of an international cricket team, you expect each one of your players, especially your vice-captain, to back you to the hilt, and to respect the captaincy in your absence.

When Fred (not for the first time) disobeyed the orders of management and led a drinking session, it was not only a blatant infraction of team rules and of the boundaries of his responsibilities as a team player, but also a personal betrayal of Vaughan's authority.

There was absolutely no excuse for what Andrew Flintoff did, and there is no denying that the impact of the incident would have been severely lessened had only the others been involved, and not him. Stripping him of the vice-captaincy was a decision that I was 100% in support of.

In coming out and saying what he recently has done, Vaughan is doing nothing but speaking the truth. If that hurts Flintoff, so be it. He deserves it.

 

[FBU]

http://sport.independent.co.uk/cricket/article2617366.ece

A good time to show Vaughan who is boss.

 

[Burgey]

Lack of ability derailed their WC, didn't it?

Poor form from Vaughan here.

 

[Prince EWS]

I really wanna kill Vaughan right now. His ego has to be the biggest on the planet! There were six players drinking that night, why do he have to blame Freddie? He should have left the past where it belongs.. but noooo.. I hope Freddie kicks his ass

He didn't blame Flintoff directly - he blamed the whole incident. Which would include all those involved with it - but obviously Flintoff primarily because he led the outing and also got in the most trouble.

 

[pasag]

This isn't going to be a popular view, but I'm behind Vaughan in this.

As the captain of an international cricket team, you expect each one of your players, especially your vice-captain, to back you to the hilt, and to respect the captaincy in your absence.

When Fred (not for the first time) disobeyed the orders of management and led a drinking session, it was not only a blatant infraction of team rules and of the boundaries of his responsibilities as a team player, but also a personal betrayal of Vaughan's authority.

There was absolutely no excuse for what Andrew Flintoff did, and there is no denying that the impact of the incident would have been severely lessened had only the others been involved, and not him. Stripping him of the vice-captaincy was a decision that I was 100% in support of.

In coming out and saying what he recently has done, Vaughan is doing nothing but speaking the truth. If that hurts Flintoff, so be it. He deserves it.

Yeah but he's been punished for that, been crucified by the media and, apologised, payed the price and moved on. Why would Vaughan bring it up again? The WC is done and dusted now and this is just unnecessarily opening up old wounds, where for all intents and purposes there was complete closure.

And I agree with Prince here. I also like an honest captain who speaks his mind and tells it how it is. But this crosses the line by a long margin, just like Smith's Monty comments. Sometimes these people should use their brain before they talk and a little bit of self-censorship is required.

Not to mention anyone that thinks England didn't get to the semis because of Flintoff's incident is clearly deluding themselves. England just weren't good enough, end of story. Which is what Vaughan and any of the 15 captains should say when asked why they didn't win the WC.

 

[Richard]

But this crosses the line by a long margin, just like Smith's Monty comments.

Probably being thick but... which ones?

 

[pasag]

Probably being thick but... which ones?

He said before the Ashes that Monty was going to get racially abused in Australia or something to that effect.

 

[Richard]

Oh, did he?

I swear this is no bias, but I don't remember that at all. Remember him saying to Flintoff that "you guys are all gonna cop it big time" or summat, but don't actually remember him saying anything particular about Panesar.

 

[pasag]

Oh, did he?

I swear this is no bias, but I don't remember that at all. Remember him saying to Flintoff that "you guys are all gonna cop it big time" or summat, but don't actually remember him saying anything particular about Panesar.

http://content-www.cricinfo.com/england/content/story/267418.html

Graeme Smith, South Africa's captain, feels that left-arm spinner Monty Panesar will face an "unbelievable amount of abuse" - some of it racist - from the vociferous Australian crowds as England defend the Ashes over the next two months.

"He is going to cop an unbelievable amount of abuse. I sincerely hope for everyone's sake, but especially his, that it isn't of a racist nature, but our own experience obviously leaves us with doubts."

Total **** for those comments. I suppose the massive cheer that rang out when Monty bowled for the first time at the MCG was racist abuse then, huh.

 

[Spitfires_Fan]

I'm adding my voice to the minority supporting Vaughan here. I feel sorry for the poor guy, everyone's so quick to jump on his back at the moment, whereas it seems Flintoff can do no wrong. Vaughan doesn't seem to have been given the benefit of the doubt at all - I'd love to know just how much the media have twisted his words in order to come up with a better story. He certainly seems to be making that as his defence.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/6725917.stm

The fact is, Flintoff is a lot like Botham - both brilliant players, but in the same way that Botham is remembered for his wildness as well as his cricketing ability, I'm sure the same will happen to Flintoff. If he doesn't want that to be the case, then he should show a bit more sense. He's one of the senior players in the side, the player that every cricket-loving kid in the country looks up to, and he should have known better than to publicly go out on the razz again, especially after England had just lost a game. I was immensely pleased to see him get castigated in the press and lose the vice captaincy as a result of his stupidity.

Yes, it's in the past now, but people are going to talk about it and remember the incident, and that's going to be a lifelong consequence - I'm sure it'll still get mentioned in 20 years time. He's a world-class cricketer and he gets all the perks that go along with that, but he's also going to be in the limelight, and things like this aren't going to just go away. Perhaps Vaughan shouldn't have spoken about it, but I imagine it's pretty difficult when facing the press and being questioned about it - they're hardly going to be satisfied with a 'no comment'.

It sounds to me like he's said his piece, been misquoted and has now reiterated his stance. It would be poor form if he'd gone out and said 'the drinking incident was all Fred's fault, and it was that that led to our poor performance in the WC', but he hasn't, so he should be given a break IMO.