Flintoff's IPL participation

[Precambrian]

Should he or shouldn't he?

The guy has had a career strewn with injuries and is now confirmed to miss a crucial test in the Windies.

The question is, he is 30+ and not going to get better in terms of fitness from here.

Hence, has the time come to evaluate his chances in limited overs cricket, including the IPL and reserve his best for Test matches? And for England?

Or like everyone else, he be also allowed to make his dough in the IPL, and it is worth taking the risk?

 

[four_or_six]

He should never have signed up in the first place. Makes me pretty pissed off tbh.

 

[Woodster]

Think it's one of those decisions, on this occasion, best left to the player. But should he return injured, he should accept the whole heap of criticism that would come his way by compromising his already injury strewn body, ahead of a massive year for England cricket.

 

[Richard]

He should never have signed up in the first place. Makes me pretty pissed off tbh.

You think you'd turn-down the vast sums (and the prestige) involved if you were given the choice, do you?

It's a question of personal choice, and I sometimes think people get a bit too righteous at the "it's your country and it should always come first". Not everyone has that outlook. I'd say I probably do myself (in cricket, though not in other sports), but I don't have any massive objection to someone taking a different outlook.

Andrew Flintoff has always seemed to me to be someone who puts England first without much hesitation so I'm sure if he thinks playing the IPL would damage any form of England prospects which he might have, he'd not do it. But if someone else were to take a different attitude, I'd not overtly criticise them.

 

[GIMH]

I agree with Richard, he won't play if he thinks it will do him harm. If he was going off to bowl hundreds of overs I'd be a bit uneasy, but I can live with a few weeks of IPL. Also, if he doesn't play the IPl I am pretty sure he'll wind up playing a few domestic games, so he might be better off facing some top class players

 

[Goughy]

I think he should play. He is getting older and is injury prone.

He cant turn down a wheelbarrow of cash at this stage of his career.

His first responsibility is to himself and family and then to England. This could be a nice part of his nestegg.

 

[Furball]

If he's fit enough, there's absolutely no reason why Flintoff shouldn't play in the IPL.

2 very important reasons why in my opinion he absolutely should play:

1. He's an average Test bowler. We can debate his merits until the thread is 100 pages long, but even if we only consider his England performances since Sri Lanka 03, he struggles to average under 30. He's a great bowler, but his statistics don't back that up. He is however, a superb limited overs bowler, and has been statisitcally the best death bowler in the world in ODIs over the last 3-4 years. If Flintoff was to give up one form of international cricket due to fitness constraints, then it should be Tests.

2. The next World Cup is in the subcontinent. The IPL represents a great chance for Flintoff to gain experience as to what is needed to be successful as a limited overs bowler in India.

 

[BoyBrumby]

In absolute terms I suppose I'm anti, but I'm not a big enough hypocrite to sit in judgement on anyone when the kind of sums reportedly being paid to him by his franchsie are in the offing.

& Personally I suspect four overs maximum in a bit of a glorified hit and giggle comp every three or four days will have neglible effect compared to the way he's consistently run into the ground by his test captains.

 

[PhoenixFire]

1. He's an average Test bowler.

 

[Furball]

Since the Ashes in 2005, what exactly has Flintoff done with the ball that would make my opinion of him wrong?

edit: statistically since the Ashes in 2005, excluding the ICC SuperSeries and matches involving Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, Flintoff's been on a par with the likes of Jacques Kallis, Zaheer Khan and Fidel Edwards, and has been out performed by Jerome Taylor and Sreesanth.

 

[Bonnie Prince C]

If I was on the ECB board I would be trying my hardest to stop Flintoff from playing in the IPL. He is clearly not fully fit and he is beginning to age so his body will take longer to recover. While he can earn a lot of money playing IPL, I still feel that test cricket is the main thing in world cricket. As someone who loves the game I would rather step out to play in the test arena than make a million. However, maybe after Flintoff's amount of tests that feeling would wear away.

 

[four_or_six]

You think you'd turn-down the vast sums (and the prestige) involved if you were given the choice, do you?

It's a question of personal choice, and I sometimes think people get a bit too righteous at the "it's your country and it should always come first". Not everyone has that outlook. I'd say I probably do myself (in cricket, though not in other sports), but I don't have any massive objection to someone taking a different outlook.

Andrew Flintoff has always seemed to me to be someone who puts England first without much hesitation so I'm sure if he thinks playing the IPL would damage any form of England prospects which he might have, he'd not do it. But if someone else were to take a different attitude, I'd not overtly criticise them.

My personal opinion is that I think he should put the Ashes first, because the bloke has shed-loads of cash. If it was most players I would understand more because the money would mean more to them. He earns more each year than most of us do in a lifetime, so to him it's not just a case of making enough for his family to be comfortable in case he were to get injured and have to retire.

Also, if he wasn't 100% for playing in the IPL if possible, I also don't think it's fair on Chennai to sign up for them and then pull out later, unless he's actually physically injured.

Edit: That said, apparently we have only won 3 of the last 20 tests that Fred played, or something like that. Perhaps it would be best for our Ashes hope that he goes and gets crocked!

 

[Richard]

I'd bet our recent win percentage without him wouldn't be great either TBH.

 

[howardj]

He probably shouldn't, but it's very easy to talk about other people sacrificing $US750 000, than it is to do so yourself

 

[Furball]

I'd bet our recent win percentage without him wouldn't be great either TBH.

Pretty sure I read an article which stated that England have performed better without Flintoff than with him.

 

[Richard]

If that applies after 2003/04, I'll be very surprised indeed.

 

[four_or_six]

I'd bet our recent win percentage without him wouldn't be great either TBH.

Since 2005, 3 wins from 20 with Flintoff, 10 wins from 21 without.

 

[Richard]

Haha, I forgot he missed the WI series in 2007.

TBF, I think you can put that stat down to the fact that he's for the most part missed series' against weaker teams and played them against stronger ones. And not very much else.

 

[howardj]

If he's so fragile that bowling five overs every two or three days is going to stuff his body, then he probably hasn't got much of a future for England anyway.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah, 3 wins V a depleted Pakistan, 3 V West Indies.

We beat NZ twice (four test wins in total) in that time as well, though those series were bloody tough.