This is plainly NOT fair!!!!

[Rachael]

I think he chose his words VERY carefully: he was exceedingly careful to talk about the incidents rather than the players and about the atmosphere created, pressure felt and difficulty they (collectively) had in handling it rather than talking about individual player failings.

Vaughan carefully AVOIDED noting differences in how each player handled the pressure... using himself as an example of a player who felt inhibited rather than blaming certain notable failures (like Flintoff) and highlighting their weak response by comparison with the comparatively much stronger response of (for example) Nixon and Bopara.

That's closing ranks in a most professional way: exemplary.

ps. A tutor of mine was once challenged about his writing style, as this was superb (and hugely admired) by erudite colleagues... but considered "challenging" by students. He wondered, in response, if he should now see himself as responsible for the intellectual and educational deficiencies of his readership - a retort Vaughan should use here if told he has been 'misconstrued'!

[Wanderer]

"Andrew Flintoff's drunken escapade after England's first World Cup match at St Lucia DESTROYED THE TEAMS MORALE AND SET THEM UP FOR FAILURE, according to Michael Vaughan."

More clear than that it simply cant be stated.

Rachael, if THAT is miscontrued, it is so by the interviewer, not the reader. Do you have to be so pedantic?

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

"Andrew Flintoff's drunken escapade after England's first World Cup match at St Lucia DESTROYED THE TEAMS MORALE AND SET THEM UP FOR FAILURE, according to Michael Vaughan."

Wanderer,

Notice how that is not a direct quote from Vaughan (i.e. according to)... the reason Vaughan never said it... You can read the whole interview here:-
http://sport.guardian.co.uk/cricket/...095358,00.html

What you will see is that the headline makers say that, but Vaughan himself never states this. Read the whole interview and if you ignore the Editorial (i.e. not a direct quote) Vaughan never actually blames Fred, but does blame the incident and it's effect on the team.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

"Andrew Flintoff's drunken escapade after England's first World Cup match at St Lucia DESTROYED THE TEAMS MORALE AND SET THEM UP FOR FAILURE, according to Michael Vaughan."

Michael Vaughan caused far more damage to the England Ashes cause than anything (including the pedalo) incedent could have caused.

Fact: Vaughan stalked Flintoff in Australia, he was never far away making Flintoff look over his shoulder.

Fact: When Vaughan played for and captained England in the Tri Nations series, he played like a club cricketer, and his captaincy was the same.

Fact: England did win that series in the end with Flintoff as captain.

Fact: Vaughan contributed nothing in the World Cup, with bat or with his captaincy.

Fact: With Vaughan as captain in the World Cup, England did not beat a team of note.

Fact: Flintoff outplayed vaughan in the Ashes 2005, probably Vaughan still smarts from that.

Fact: England did poor as soon as England's tour of Pakistan in 2005, with Vaughan as captain.

Fact: Flintoff did better in India getting a fighting draw, while averaging 50+ with the bat.

Fact: Flintoff did have a nights drinking, and ended up in a pedalo.

Fact: This would not have destroyed the England moral - had it done so, the rest of the England players would have been mentaly bankrupt.

Fact: Flintoff has been the better player of the two since 2004/05

In my humble opinion - Vaughan with this rant is just trying to see the back of Flintoff, he knows while he fails with the bat - Flintoff will still be a world class bowler.

Michael Vaughan - for blaming Flintoff for his poor captaincy in the World Cup, and his own very poor form:-

Should resign with immediate effect - the sooner the better, I would rather have Bell as captain.

[flanflinger]

I was just thinking Ern had been a bit quiet!!

Think you too have been suckered into believing the headlines and not the actual quotes..

The FACT is that an incident as public as the Fredalo incident was always going to have an effect on the team. Whether it was the cause of the World Cup failure different matter..

Does he actually say - "the reason we did so badly in the World Cup was cause of Fred" ?? No, he says that the incident had an effect on the team...if you can find where Vaughan actually says - we lost the World Cup because of Flintoff in quotes; I will happily withdraw all my posts on this matter.

http://sport.guardian.co.uk/cricket/...095358,00.html

The fact is you won't, he didn't say it.. the headline makers did..

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Rachael, if THAT is miscontrued, it is so by the interviewer, not the reader. Do you have to be so pedantic?

The reader who misconstrued that was the "Cricinfo Staff" headline writer who tried sensationalising their rehash of the Guardian origninal: typically sloppy.

Headline writers are generally terrible. One Telegraph nit headed an early Derek Pringle article (reporting a Sehwag century) as something like "Sehwag emerges from Tendulkar's shadow": as if one knock by a second rate opener is all it takes to escape from the shadow of one of the top Test batsmen of all time.

[Wanderer]

I have read that flan...and I agree that Vaughan did not say "I blame Flintoff", directly.

But what I am getting at, is this paragraph :

Originally Posted by guardian

It is curious, then, that he should pinpoint Flintoff's embarrassing spin in a pedalo as the night when England's World Cup fell apart

And that is what I'm getting at.

He may not have said so DIRECTLY, but with his choice of words it was easy enough for the world's press to pick up on that and run their headlines with it. Why? Because it is sensational.

Why didn't Vaughan just say: There were many outside influences that also affected our performance? No, he specifically mentions Freddaloo.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by Rachael

The reader who misconstrued that was the "Cricinfo Staff" headline writer who tried sensationalising their rehash of the Guardian origninal: typically sloppy..

I must admit, the SA e-papers have also picked up on the story...and they're running with the same headline as cricinfo...

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

There were many outside influences that also affected our performance? No, he specifically mentions Freddaloo.

He later mentions the death of Woolmer, does that help? But basically he was responding to whether the "Fredalo" incident had an effect on morale. He does not, and you can read it, ever state that the failure in the World Cup was due purely down to Fred. However, it is ludicrous to suggest that such an incident would have had no effect what-so ever.

So what we have is Michael Vaughan saying, yes it was a factor (but there were others) and the headline makers writing Vaughan slams Flintoff for World Cup failure..

But lets look who does he blame - directly - and I think you will find this is a direct quote:-

Originally Posted by MPV

In the World Cup I was more tense than I've ever been as a captain. Duncan [Fletcher] was more tense than he'd ever been as a coach. And sometimes the captain and coach have to look at the way they're acting because the team follows. I didn't captain as well as I should've done because of the pressure I put myself under. I'd openly admit that. But I couldn't switch off because away from the field there was so much going on - with Bob Woolmer and Fred-alo.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

6 of one, half a dozen of the other. We were **** before the pedelo incident with a poor squad and we were **** afterwards. Fred ****ing about on a boat would have affected moral a bit - you wouldnt have wanted to go out and after the results you'd probably need a pint or two. BUT, either way its a storm in an egg cup. A minature one at that, and rach is right - its a headline for a headlinrs sake. The BBC is normally the worse for that - I'm going to check that they havent said "vaughan calls fred a drunk and wifebeater who delibrately ran around a cruise ship into the team hotel while high on crack" ------actually no they havent. Surprising. I notice the head chap from lancs has thrown the toys out - slightly cheeky considering he's probably played about 10 games for them in the last 4 years. More headlines !