Reading through this website and others, it becomes clear that probably 90% of england fans think that the current coach's knowledge of cricket could probably be written down on the back of a postage stamp.

I find it incredible to believe that, based on a couple of close selection calls, he is suddenly clueless. England have lost only one series since the 2002-2003 ashes (away to pakistan) which suggests fletch knows something.

Point 1. "Fletcher's faves" Apparently Chris Read and Monty Panesar are only kept out of the side due to Geraint Jones and Ash giles having some form of blackmail hold on the coach. The purists feel it is a disgrace to pick on character ahead of talent. Presumably these same purists are livid that Flecther fave Collingwood scored 206 runs rather than seeing a technically marvelous run-a-ball 16 from Graeme Hick.

At one point fletcher seemed to be the only man in world cricket who thought Colly was a test match player. Nasser admitted having doubts about him. Athers did not back the coach's hunch on a chubby somerset opener called Trescothick. No one had heard of the firebrand welsh quick bowler. Eyebrows were raised at the selection of 35-averaging yorkshire bat Michael vaughan. People despaired at craig white's recall years ago, yet he did a valuable job until a chap called flintoff lost some weight.

Do all of fletchers picks work out? No, of course not, anthony mcgrath should never have got near an england shirt. Ditto ed smith. However fletch has been proved right about players he did not fancy, such as chris adams and ed giddins.

Last test, fletch got pelters, however giles scored some runs, colly did well at 4 and jones kept wicket faultlessly...(and has been good in this match) whether or not they should have been picked in the first place is a different matter, but it seems to me that fletch is unfairly criticised.

One last thing. I am as excited by monty as anyone, but he has 32 test wickets. he is not a world beater, just a promising bowler.

Wrong Topper.

For a start Jones is favoured by Fletcher - not Read.
Also Fletcher is being judged on England's results since winning the Ashes in 2005, Giles/Panesar is only a side issue.

Blackmail?? - well that's a new slant, I have been reading that Giles and Harmison have only got into the England side due to being big mates of Flintoff.

Fletcher IMO will be judged on the outcome of this Ashes series, not on Panesar/Giles or Read/Jones.

The executive of England cricket - and this includes Fletcher IMO made a serious mistake in letting the England side appear like drunken idiots in front of the whole nation/world in the victory parade, and also underestimating Pakistan.

__________________
Ern

I've never questioned Fletcher's effectiveness.... and it's certainly been the case, thus far, that he's allowed the captains to shape their teams in their own image. Much of our impression of the guy has therefore been shaped as much by Hussain and Vaughan as by the man himself.

I think it's fair to say that there are many ways of building a successful side... and Fletcher's way... based on backing temperament above talent and on working to produce "multi-dimensional players" (who others might term bits-and-pieces-nobodies) finds support in Woolmer and tied in nicely with Hussain's ambition to become (rather as New-Zealand were) "tough to beat".

The casualties have been talented batsmen, bowlers and glovemen: temperament allows decent players to achieve... consistency: worthy, but hardly noble.

I've a lot of time for the grander vision of Rod Marsh... backing talent, regarding it as the job of the captain and coach to help the players realise what strikes the selectors as potential to go well beyond the merely "consistent". Thus picking Russell (or even Piper) over Stewart, Read over Jones, Ramps over Hussain, Bell over Collingwood, Keedy over Croft / Giles / Batty, pretty much anyone over early-career Flintoff and so on.

With all that said... one thing has consistently appalled me about Fletcher: his obsession with pace. He never had time for Bicknell or Sidebottom. After the last Sri Lanka tour he was ready to consign Hoggard to the same scrapheap (only Vaughan's insistence saved England's most accomplished bowler). He's currently doing the same to Lewis (who should surely have racked up far, far more Tests than Anderson to date).

I would'nt say that Fletcher is stupid... I would say that he's made plenty of mistakes in this tour and the fact that a few of them have turned out ok does'nt change the reality that they were still wrong.

Not picking Chris Read and Monty Panesar is boadering on criminal... The guys who are occupying their positions are 'jack of all trades, masters of none' at best while quality talent is left on the bench.

__________________
It's hard enough to remember my opinions, without remembering my reasons for them!
Nietzsche

The Ashes 2005 England v Australia.

Fred Flintoff
Simon Jones
Steve Harmison
Matty Hoggard - won the Ashes back for England.

Alternative England attack.

Flintoff
Bicknell
Hoggard
Sidebottom

Rachael are you seriously suggesting this attack would have won back the Ashes like the above line up did?.

__________________
Ern

I would have Chris Read in my side, but Beny can you really see Ponting running scared of Panesar, he might in the next Ashes, but Panesar being part of this tour is giving his experience, Panesar could not have done better than Warne, and he has not been effective at Adelaide.

I suppose being England batsmen have come good, it would not have hurt to give him a try in Giles place, he has done nothing either.

If England were one two up with one to play, that would be different, but England after the Gabba are playing catch up cricket - and playing safe.

__________________
Ern

I've no problem with 2005-vintage Simon Jones, Flintoff and Harmison being picked... but Jones was dire prior to that season (making Devon Malcolm look like Brian Statham) and Mahmood, for instance, should not have played a single Test last summer.... and that's just typical Fletcher.

Right at the momment I can't see Ponting running scared of anybody... But certinly not Giles. If you are going to pick a spinner then pick a half decent spinner not some guy who can lob a few up and then hopefully score 20 or 30 runs later on.

__________________
It's hard enough to remember my opinions, without remembering my reasons for them!
Nietzsche

I can't see Panesar doing much in Australia he is not in the same class as other offspinners like Vettori, Singh or Muralitharan. He obviously is not rated by the English camp as being any better with the ball than Giles otherwise he would be in the side.

__________________
Bill Ponsford - The only one who could play in Bradman’s company and make it a duet.

Malcolm: Tests 40 8480 4748 128 9/57 10/137 37.09 3.35 66.25 7 5 2

Bicknell Tests 4 1080 543 14 4/84 6/155 38.78 3.01 74.14 1 0 0

Sidebottom only played one Test - with no wickets.

He played two ODIs taking two wickets at an average of 42 with an econ rate of six.

Look at Devon Malcolm's fine record - played 40 matches with a strike rate of 66.25 - compared with Bicknells 74.14.

Dev Malcolm took his wickets @an average of 37.09 - compared with Bicknell @38.78.

Ok Bicknell and Sidebottom did not play many matches, but Malcolm kept this excellent strike rate up for 40 matches, and bowled at the likes Of Richards and co.

How would England's chances of squaring the series be if Malcolm was able to take Anderson.s place, pretty good I reackon.
Also England have a malcolm type bowler in Mahmood, if ever he was to be given a chance - it would be when England had scored 550-6 dec.

__________________
Ern