Hes not just lurking.. come wednesday Vaughn will play.. and i daresay if there is no dramatic turnaround in the next test fom England.. He will come back in the Ashes

http://timesonline.typepad.com/line_...play.html#more

__________________

Rachel, how much of the first Test did you watch ?

Lol so Warnes action is offcolor eh? and he still takes 4 wickets in the second innings...wow

i wouldnt like to see the day when his action is on form... what would he do then.. well we shall soon find out wont we?

R no offence but if you think Giles is equal or better than Warne... even in this match only.. please pass on what you are drinking :P

Please back this up with facts Rachael - the only question mark over Flintoff being captain is the fact that he is an all rounder.
Please back tell us who these people are who say Strauss is more "cerebrall" than Flintoff!!!
Rachael - Harmison has been the first choice bowler for England by all captains - was Vaughan is mate as well?, and was Strauss a mate of Harmison also?.
Giles is also supposed to be a big mate of Flintoff also, and that's why he is playing - Fletcher is the coach, Flintoff is the junior partner of the tour selectors.
I don't understand what you are saying here - what idea was barmy?, you arn't trying to say Flintoff was made captain to get the best out of Harmison - are you?.

__________________
Ern

Ern, Strauss made the best of his Radley school education and got into Durham university and then rapidly ascended to the captaincy of Middlesex. Flintoff's education produced a lad whose most cerebral act was introducing page three pin-ups to the Lancashire dressingroom! He's a great lad... but he is NOT the most cerebral of characters!

For evidence I'd cite just about every article written on the two when the England captaincy was an issue: even those who wanted Flintoff generally admitted that Strauss would be a more thoughful, reflective captain!

Any interest in answering my question Rachel ? Or will you avoid it, as usual ?

I can see what you are getting at but because a person has been to university does not mean that person is more cerebral than a less educated person - I find that highly educated people can be very narrow in their way of thinking, educated only in the subject they studied.
Atherton was a captain that was earmarked as a future England captain by all the pundits after only a handfull of matches, but he was mediocre as a captain and a batsman - averaging under 40.
This boils down to class - living in the North of England I have encountered class all my life, and believe me things can be bitter.
Myself I did not go to university - I wanted to strike out on my own, this had two advantages I was classless, but also what I would achieve would be in my own hands.
Class or education does not really have a bearing on what makes a cricket captain, it's what savvy he has for cricket - the very narrow field of cricket.
Intelligence is what is needed to be a cricket captain rather than education.
I agree with education - both my elder children went to university, one is a maths teacher, the other an engineer, I was always self employed - but I would IMO made the better captain because I have always had to make decissions to make a crust.

The counter argument to this would be that a captain can be to thoughtful, to the point that he might worry, and this would reflect in how he captained a side - Flintoff has not been captain long enough for us to judge just how thought full he can be,also like Vaughan before him on the last tour of Australia, this squad is the pits, due in part to Trescothick having to go home, and Harrison's problems - also Flintoff is not qualified to council Harmison, he need professional help - his condition is akin to 'agoraphobia' it's up to Harmison how he fights that.

__________________
Ern

He is considered more cerebral because he is a much better strategist then Flintoff Ern.


The guy can think par to Ponting... Vaughn could think better than him, part of the reason why you guys won last time.

__________________

Like I said to Rachael - prove it.

Flintoff won a Test in India - not many England captains can say that.

Until of late when the Aussie players are getting older, the Australia team must have been thee easiest team to captain, how good is Ponting, hard to quantify.
Oh a big reason England won last time was FLINTOFF - the person that everyone is writing of before his career as a captain starts.
With the pace attack England had last year - I dare say I could have captained that side.
These are the reasons people are giving for saying Strauss would make a better captain that Flintoff.

Rachael things is down to Strauss being more educated, and having more upstairs, no evidence to support that.

You Mr Hutt thinks that Strauss is a better strategist, no evidence to support that either, even Rachael says Strauss is more thoughtful, that could lead to indecision.

Most people say it's to much for him to bear being an all-rounder, only time could say if that body of opinion is right or not.

To these people I would say there is a precedent for an all-rounder England captain - Tony Greig.

__________________
Ern

Did he (as opposed to his team) not also lose a test match at home to Sri Lanka? Not a lot of English captains can add this to the CV either.