Hussain retires from all first class cricket

[Kirsty Harris]

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak

You tell em Kirsty !!!!!

People will always criticise Hussain, no matter what the poor guy does! England need to accept that Hussain ain't around anymore and just get on with it. They can blame no-one but themselves if they don't do well from here onwards.

Butcher's place was never really at risk, he's a proven performer at Test level, and made that No.3 slot his own, I don't see him going anywhere soon.

The big problem now in my mind is still that opening partnership - as I said before the start of the NZ Test Series - that's the biggest problem area - I just hope they don't shove Strauss in the middle order! Although I can see they may well be tempted to do it. In many ways the Vaughan injury/Strauss proving himself on debut/Nas retiring issue will be good for England in the longer term, because they may well be forced to do something about that opening partnership. Now's a good time to do it, if they're going to do it, but could prove to be more difficult than deciding who should be left out had Hussain not retired!

I think Strauss should open - keep him in the batting position he's used to. He's inexperienced at Test level, so play him at the position he's used to. But who to partner him with? Has to be Tresco in my mind, Vaughan should drop to No.4, and play in the slot Nas played in - his chance now to play that kind of 'pivotal' Captain's innings he's been yearning to do as an opener - but kept failing!

I'd feel a lot more comfortable with that opening partnership, as long as Strauss gets a good start, I won't mind so much what 'banger' Tresco does, but he's now under the spotlight in my mind. His place is the one most under threat now, lets see how he gets on with a new opener!

Scott

Scott

One of the things that has really annoyed me since Hussain annonced he might be retiring is the abrupt about turn from large parts of the media. All of the hacks and ex-players who were pressing for Hussain to go because he was passed it were suddenly singing his praises and many suggesting he stay on for the time being.

I suspect that they were caught on the back foot by Hussains annoncement, and didn't actually expect him to retire at this stage, but thought they should get the knife in early in order to crow over his being dropped from the side later in the summer.

Last laugh to Nass!!!

The situation with who will open is a tricky one! Strauss said on the cricket show that he would bat where he was told, which sugggest that they may be considering dropping him down the order for the time being (I know the squad hasn't been annonced but I'm sure there would have been discussion this week about it). We shall see...Warne seems to think Tres should be dropped from the side (although that was before Nass retired), so there is finally someone else who agrees with you on Tres!!

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by Kirsty Harris

I suspect that they were caught on the back foot by Hussains annoncement, and didn't actually expect him to retire at this stage, but thought they should get the knife in early in order to crow over his being dropped from the side later in the summer.

Kirsty

I think it was because Nas made them all to look fools, by his superb Century at Lords. In the same way that its hard to drop a debutant who makes a Ton in his first innings, it's just as hard to drop an established player. I remember clearly how uncomfortable Botham looked when discussing Nas's innings with Gower and Willis in Sky sport afterwards. He did not look comfortable at all, in fact he looked a lot like a naughty schoolboy who'd stuffed his pockets with sweets and didn't want to share any!

Originally Posted by Kirsty Harris

The situation with who will open is a tricky one! Strauss said on the cricket show that he would bat where he was told, which sugggest that they may be considering dropping him down the order for the time being (I know the squad hasn't been annonced but I'm sure there would have been discussion this week about it).

It certainly is a tricky one, I'm not sure I'd want to make that decision! I think it will be a big mistake to drop Strauss down the order, I don't understand Vaughan's reluctance to do the right thing and drop himself to 4.

Originally Posted by Kirsty Harris

Warne seems to think Tres should be dropped from the side (although that was before Nass retired), so there is finally someone else who agrees with you on Tres!!

Chuckle - finally someone?

I don't really look for others to agree with me, I make my own mind up about things as I see them, but it is interesting that someone of Warne's quality has chosen to express this view publicly, so I guess it's not just me that see's Trescothick as being a problem. I need to read the article and see exactly what Warne is saying, but in my mind Tresco is very susceptible to the seaming/swinging ball as I've said many times on here.

The next Test, if its as bowler friendly as people are saying it will be, will be a very good test of Tresco.

Scott

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by Kirsty Harris

We shall see...Warne seems to think Tres should be dropped from the side (although that was before Nass retired), so there is finally someone else who agrees with you on Tres!!

Kirsty

Interestingly CMJ also seems to think Vaughan may be better batting at No.4 as well, but suggests Trescothick may also do better dropping down the order - something I don't agree with. Full article -

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...126695,00.html

Scott

[R W S]

If you want more opinion on batting orders have a look at

Key form may hold sway Mike Selvey


and

Question of where not who Vic Marks

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by R W S

If you want more opinion on batting orders have a look at

R W S

Yep, agree pretty much with both those articles, although the Selvey one is more fence sitting.

I've advocated Vaughan moving to No.4 now for some time - this gives them the chance to make this change with some face saving. I still don't buy the arguments on Tresco moving down the order - I don't see the logic in it, whereas there is logic in Vaughan moving down, he's clearly struggled in the opener role since he's taken on the Captaincy. As Selvey says:

Thirdly, though, and perhaps most pertinently, Vaughan's responsibilities as captain appear to be draining his batting resource at the top of the order with 13 matches in charge bringing him 814 runs at 33.24 with two centuries, against eight hundreds and an average of almost 52 prior to assuming the leadership. It is a drop that has started to assume significance.

In Tresco's case, he either needs to fix whatever problems he's having, as Warne says you don't have to be einstein to figure out how to bowl to Trescothick and get him out or he needs to be dropped. Moving him down the order merely delays the inevitable in my mind.

Scott

[R W S]

By Derek Pringle
(Filed: 29/05/2004)


Their immediate task eased by the accommodating departure of Nasser Hussain, the most pressing problem for England's selectors ahead of next week's second Test at Headingley is to decide who will fill the vacant No 4 spot.


The appointment will come from within the squad, so outsiders in the runs - such as Robert Key, Scott Newman and Ian Bell - need not apply, at least for the moment.

Red-hot form has swayed selectors in the past and Key, with five hundreds for Kent already his season, including a career-best 199 against Surrey yesterday, is on fire. But England are winning and, as such, gestures like Key's tend to get overlooked.

The favourite for No 4 now, fitness permitting, looks like being the returning captain, Michael Vaughan. He will test his fitness for Yorkshire, against Scotland, on Monday in a National League in Edinburgh. If 45 overs in the field do not give his dodgy knee enough of a workout, the drive back should.

The arguments for Vaughan, rather than Marcus Trescothick, dropping down to accommodate golden boy Andrew Strauss are all hypothetical. As captain, runs one theory, he could do with more time to put his feet up. He is the side's best batsman, and best batsmen bat at four, says coach Duncan Fletcher.

Vaughan is the consummate team man, and apparently has no problems with dropping down the order, a decision he considered long before Fletcher's sweet talk. But an undeniable requirement of any team is runs, and Vaughan has scored more, as an opener, in the past 18 months than anyone except Australia's Matthew Hayden.

Vaughan has batted at four before, but not with distinction. He averages 26 there, compared with 49 as an opener. In any case, Trescothick, whose minimal feet movement make him vulnerable to the seam and swing that often accompany the new ball, plays spin exceptionally well, and number fours are just as likely to start their innings against spin as seam.

Other permutations for the slot would be Mark Butcher and Strauss, though shifting Butcher down from three would mean two players being disrupted. If he does not, it could mean three left-handers in a row, a boon for bowlers who would not need to adjust their line.

In times past, it would have been the new boy's lot to fit in around the seniors. But Strauss's 185 runs in just one Test make his position in the batting order look the most sacrosanct of all.

Headingley, like the May Lord's Test, has a reputation for being seamer-friendly. For that reason, teams have tended to play the extra batsman, especially if he can fiddle a few overs, too - a role for which Paul Collingwood could be considered despite his moderate form with Durham.

By logical extension, spinners have tended to be superfluous. Yet, a lack of rain on that side of the Pennines during recent weeks has made the square very dry, and England will want Ashley Giles there just in case the pitch offers spin.

With Strauss now officially replacing Hussain, the remainder of the squad should be the same as the one that assembled at Lord's before Vaughan collapsed in a heap to set an extraordinary chain of events in motion - a process that culminated in the retirement of England's most senior player.

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by R W S

Vaughan is the consummate team man, and apparently has no problems with dropping down the order, a decision he considered long before Fletcher's sweet talk. But an undeniable requirement of any team is runs, and Vaughan has scored more, as an opener, in the past 18 months than anyone except Australia's Matthew Hayden.

I find it incredible to beleive that Vaughan has scored as many runs as Hayden in the last 18 months, without checking it I can't say for sure, but it sounds like a load of old b*llocks to me.

Originally Posted by R W S

Vaughan has batted at four before, but not with distinction. He averages 26 there, compared with 49 as an opener.

Another example of solitary stats being used completely out of context can make them say what you want them to say. The range and number of innings used to calculate Vaughan's average as an opener is huge, plus he's spent most of his time playing as an opener - and more importantly - most of his recent (last few years) innings as an opener when he was most experienced and at his best - of course his average as an opener is going to be good.

Conversely - he's played very few times at No.4 (which slants the average if there are a few low scores) and equally importantly - he played at No 4 very early in his England career, when he was being tried out all over the place and when he was most inexperienced.

How can you compare one stat to another in this way and be able to draw any conclusion from it? What rubbish.

The much more useful statistic that tells us more about Vaughan's batting is the pre and post Captain phase of his career that Selvey used.

Scott

[Kirsty Harris]

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak

Kirsty

I think it was because Nas made them all to look fools, by his superb Century at Lords. In the same way that its hard to drop a debutant who makes a Ton in his first innings, it's just as hard to drop an established player. I remember clearly how uncomfortable Botham looked when discussing Nas's innings with Gower and Willis in Sky sport afterwards. He did not look comfortable at all, in fact he looked a lot like a naughty schoolboy who'd stuffed his pockets with sweets and didn't want to share any! Scott

This morning, I was reading the Press Cuttings column by Stephen Moss in this months Wisden Cricketer, and apparently the fountain of all knowledge, Simon Wilde summed up Hussains winter contribution by saying that future centrey's look beyond him.I don't care to read Wilde's columns myself, because I've always suspected his an idiot, but I'd love to know what he had to say after Hussains effort at Lords ..

Intersetingly, the Stephen Moss's column was entitled 'Picking Holes' and highlighted the tendency of the press to put a negative slant on the England side's victory in the West Indies. I love this quote 'How quickly, in our eagerness to find fault with the present, we forget how tuely awful it used to be'! Very true!!!