Gough for the sack

[sledger]

surely after that miserable display in the icc final the time has come ofr the selectors to permamnently sack darren gough and turn their attentions to james anderson or another up and coming bowler.Although i would be very dissapointed if they chose to appoint sajit mahmood as his replacement as i feel ans do many others that he is not upto th ejob.

alex wharf has done well and he should now stay in the side until there is reason to replace him.

nbut now the writing is on the wall for gough, evenb a bowler such as james kirtly or dimi mascheranas would be a better option than him,

but my opinion at th ecurrent time is that james anderson must be perseveredf with and given a chance to show his ability with a prolonged spell in the side. but the bottom line is that gough must go!

 

[The Baconator]

ye i don't think goughy will be around come the ashes and south africa could be his last international cricket if he plays there and i do agree that anderson needs persevering with hes got potential

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Wharf has done crap. He had a good debut but that was mainly due to India trying to hit him out the park when he bowled short..the moment teams realise he just bangs the ball in over after over he's pretty easy to handle. Id rather we Dropped Wharf than Gough, granted he had a bad final but he's been magnificent for us bar that.

 

[superkingdave]

Wharf for Dmitri, Gough for Anderson, Solanki for Pieterson

 

[Scaly piscine]

Gough has been magnificent for us bar that?!? Like when? Gough has been steady most of the time, but for someone who's useless at batting and probably the slowest fielder (put him in the deep and watch those 1s turn into 2s) he should be a lot more useful as a bowler to make up for these deficiencies. The last 2 matches he's been a liability and it's clear even in helpful conditions he just can't bowl good batsmen out. Anderson has been pretty good in ODIs, he was only really dropped from them because of some poor Test bowling and he's also a far better fielder than gough. I don't really see an argument for keeping Gough in the side any more.

 

[steds]

I say we need Gough's experience, he played more ODI's than most of the other bowlers put together. However, Anderson should come in for Wharf

 

[Richard]

I say Gough should no longer be thought of as a death bowler - he is, however, more than capable of opening up, bowling 10 overs straight through and doing a good job.
All right, his last 2 games have been poor. Wow. Anyone can have 2 bad ODIs - even Golden Boy had 2 in the NatWest Series. No-one called for his head then - oh, no, he's Steve Harmison, even though before this summer his ODI career had been a horror-story.
James Anderson has been poor in recent ODIs and Alex Wharf's selection has by and large been shown-up as the howler it is. 7 overs for 45 against the might of Zimbabwe, for Christ's sake. Now he plays a big part in losing the final.
As for the suggestion of James Kirtley playing ODIs ahead of him, that's laughable at best. Anyone remember what happened the last time Kirtley played ODIs? Or the time before that? Or anyone notice how terrible he was for most of the National League season 2004?
You might as well set Collingwood, Vaughan and Trescothick to bowl 10 than pick Kirtley again.
Gough has been easily England's best ODI bowler for the last 10 years and some people would drop him because of 2 poor games!

 

[Langeveldt]

Bar Gough and Solanki (how many decent innings out of how many?), Englands post McGrath, Clarke lineup have been most impressive.. Good to see them rallying behind Flintoff and Vaughan.. And Tres is in marvellous form!

 

[Richard]

Tres has - at last - recovered his form!
He was abysmal in the 8 games prior to the Champions Trophy (wasn't great against Zimbabwe, either).
Vaughan, meanwhile, has simply played another good innings against Australia, nothing more - take out games against them, his ODI average is even poorer than it is already.
He's starting to turn into another Laxman. Can do it against the best - but contrary to seemingly popular wisdom, that's not enough. It's every bit as bad (or really it's far, far worse) to perform against the best and fail against the rest than vice-versa.
England's ODI side currently consists of 4 convincing players (Trescothick, Flintoff, Harmison, Giles).

 

[Langeveldt]

England's ODI side currently consists of 4 convincing players (Trescothick, Flintoff, Harmison, Giles).

And you are mini world cup finalists, having beaten Australia..

Is there any pleasing any England fans?

 

[Richard]

Some, yes, but it takes more than 4 victories out of 6 (one that happened to break a losing-streak so long some can't remember it starting) to convince me that any real corner has been turned.
West Indies can rightfully claim to be a better ODI side than England; New Zealand and Australia certainly can; Sri Lanka and India can claim various excuses for their demises (poor form and a one-off match with no opportunity for comeback - plus a single dropped catch probably decided that game); and South Africa - sorry to say - have been woefully underperforming for the last 18 months. Pakistan, as ever, cannot have their true status labelled as it changes from game to game.
I don't know what's going to happen in South Africa this winter (can't help feeling you guys might slip-up - again) but at this rate it's going to be the battle for the wooden-spoon of true ODI-class nations.

 

[Langeveldt]

I don't know what's going to happen in South Africa this winter (can't help feeling you guys might slip-up - again) but at this rate it's going to be the battle for the wooden-spoon of true ODI-class nations.

"We don't play cricket any more" said a South African i know..

That sums it up for me.. Have the captaincy back shauny, all is forgiven

 

[Richard]

How that will improve Herschelle's form (though interestingly he lost form at precisely the time Graeme got the captaincy...), Makhaya and Andre's bowling or any of the other players who've had problems recently I'm not certain.
Personally I think continuity would be the best option - so many times we've seen stuff that fails for even 2 years suddenly go right.
I'd not say Graeme's captaincy has been overtly poor, certainly no worse than Shaun Pollock's.
Obviously it's not in Hansie's league.

 

[steds]

Make Zulu captain!!!!!!

 

[Langeveldt]

I dont think Smith's captaincy is particularly poor.. But if the guys dont perform their best under smith, then there is nothing you can do but get a change in... Not particularly smith's fault, I don't think they gel under him, and he seems to pump everything out of all proportion...

 

[Richard]

I can't believe Pollock would take the captaincy back if they offered it him. He made it quite clear he didn't want to go ITFP.
Any other candidates? I think giving Kallis the captaincy would be a bad move from every perspective - don't think he'd make a good captain and it might well affect him. Say the same for Klusener. Gibbs would make as good a captain as anyone like him would - he's not the right sort of person. Rudolph doesn't strike me as quite the captaincy material - one 22-year-old was a surprise enough, anyway. Can't think of anyone else who's secure in the side - well, except Ntini, and we all know captains need to be able to bat.

 

[Langeveldt]

Neil McKenzie, Jacques Rudolph.. None of whom are dead set permanant members...

Mark Boucher?

 

[Richard]

Wicketkeepers often make great vice-captains.
IMO it's never a good idea to make one a captain - wicketkeeping is so difficult as it is, switching off between balls is inestimatebly vital. You can't, obviously, do that as a captain.
I do actually think Boucher would make an excellent captain were he not a wicketkeeper, BTW.
McKenzie needs to get himself in the side first - I cringe whenever I see he's wasted his latest chance, it's such a waste of a marvellous talent.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Alex Wharf's selection has by and large been shown-up as the howler it is. 7 overs for 45 against the might of Zimbabwe, for Christ's sake. Now he plays a big part in losing the final.

That's extremely harsh. IMO Wharf bowled really well and the English bowlers didn't lose that game. Rather the West Indies lower order won it with the possible help of some poor bowler management at the end by Vaughan.

As for the suggestion of James Kirtley playing ODIs ahead of him, that's laughable at best. Anyone remember what happened the last time Kirtley played ODIs? Or the time before that? Or anyone notice how terrible he was for most of the National League season 2004?
You might as well set Collingwood, Vaughan and Trescothick to bowl 10 than pick Kirtley again.

And that determines whether a player plays international cricket again? Before Butcher in Tests... Harmison in ODIs... players can improve...

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Have the captaincy back shauny, all is forgiven

What did he do wrong in the first place?