On your first point that just proves he is a potential Test player does it not?, he should sulk if the captain would not bowl him, he should want to bowl for his side more than anything.

On your secong point a fast bowler should have attitude, in fact most of the best fast bowlers have had an attitude in one way or another, really all that was at fault IMO was his original choice of words.

I think if a player is competative, he/she is bound to have an attitude to some degree, that in part makes a player competative.

Rachael has this thing over Mahmood, and to a greater extent Devon Malcolm, if anyone ever watched Malcolm play - they would know he gave his all, he was expensive at times sure, but he took important top order wickets, and without his lone influence in English true fast bowling, I dount there would have been a Simon Jones, a Steve Harmison or even a Flintoff.

The England selectors were desperate to find a true fast bowler, England had Willis - but since Snow had no real pace bowlers until Malcolm, he finished his international career early (not long after demolishing the South African's) probable for political reasons, but was still a force in county cricket right up until he retired.

Mahmood and Tremlett are the future of England pace bowling IMO, and to rubbish Mahmood, and praise Broad as was done earlier - is just plain nonsence IMO.

And while on that subject - I would like like to put Rachael wise as to why Malcolm at first was a poor fielder, it was because of his eyesight, he improved when he got fitted with contact lenses.

We are selecting an A Team, and such a team is meant to be a learning experience - and to iron out wrinkles from players like Mahmood and others who with coaching and practice would be world class players.

__________________
Ern