Thread: Who should be England's wicket-keeper?
View Single Post
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 03-01-2007, 03:19 PM in reply to first change's post starting "Interesting point, but the idea that he..."
Rachael Rachael is offline
Administrator
WAT selector
Selector-World XI (1980 onwards)
(ENG-captain) Passed Mike Atherton's 7728 Test runs
  
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Norfolk
My main national team: None - I support cricket in general
Posts: 7,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by first change
For what it's worth, had he been fully fit, I would have preferred England's lower order to have read: Ramprakash, Flintoff, Read, Harmison, Panesar, Hoggard. But that's not been the case, and you have to work with what you've got.
I'd have done the same thing (well, maybe not Harmison). The difference is that with Flintoff NOT fit I'd have kept the others... and brought in a replacement seamer.

Whichever way you look at it... Flintoff was not ready for this series: call it jaded if you like... he has at no point looked capable of doing justice to his own talents... and it's just plain immoral to deprive others who are fit of Ashes caps through loyalty to a player carrying / recovering from an injury.
Last edited by Rachael : 03-01-2007 at 03:22 PM.
Reply With Quote