Originally Posted by Rachael

We're only ever going to be as good as the guys we routinely leave out: it's ther pressure from credible alternatives on the sidelines and the availability of classy injury replacements that marks out the teams with the strength in depth to set the pace.

This is the first time in years we've actually got a guy making a decent case for inclusion at the expense of a proven performer. If Hussain retires we're back to square one: worrying whether Collingwood is the genuine article or just a ODI man... speculating about Pietersen... rushing guys back from injury / playing them when they aren't match fit / fearing to rest someone even when it's in their own best interest.

Originally Posted by Goatman

It is not a simple case of picking the players with the highest/highest recent average/scored the most runs in the last match. Every player in a team is doing a specialist role:- Trescothick and Vaughan look to dominate the bowling. Hussain is a sheet-anchor. Butcher can do either, to some extent (which is why he is a good 3). Thorpe and Strauss accumulate without needing to dominate. Thorpe (and therefore I'd guess Strauss) is also magnificent at batting with the tail. You can't simply switch player A for player B and expect it not to impact in other areas. There's more to selection than averages, and there's much more to it than form! IF Strauss cannot be dropped, then the discussion of who IS dropped certainly shouldn't be on the basis of who is in the worst form! It should be on the basis of which player will least impact the teams flexibility/toughness by not playing.