What a cheek!
Michael vaughen thinks he is still a selector, he has been lurking in the background undermining Flintoff IMO.

He says:-
Oh goody - now we have 3 possible captains again, it shows Vaughan has NEVER been far away from the England camp.

I like this for cheek:-
We?? - where does he get the we from?, he is not even a member of the squad.

He is of couse taling about the One Day Series after the Tests have finished, but whoever captains the one day side, you can bet will be the captain for the summer , and how short the odds that it will be Vaughan?.

More click here

__________________
Ern

I don't see anything wrong with what Vaughan said. He's simply indicating that he is interested in captaining England again. If he didn't say that it might be misinterpreted by the media as if he was no longer interested in the captaincy. My view on the captaincy is that the selectors won't take it away from Flintoff because it would upset Flintoff and be an admission that they made the wrong choice. Flintoff would have to give the captaincy up voluntarily and I'd be very surprised if he did that. I think Vaughan has no chance to get the captaincy back and should concentrate on his form to force his way back into the Test side. IMO, he should not be selected in the one-dayers.

This is what I object to Mike.
he knows full well that the odds are not with England doing that well in the last two games, it will take a large turnaround in Englands fortunes.

Why did he not just make himself available for selection, also saying he would accept the job as captain if the job became available.

__________________
Ern

So you honestly believe if Vaughan was fit to play a full part in the one day series that Flintoff should still be captain?

I knew there was a Lancashire bias but that would just be heart ruling head much like Fletcher did with Geraint Jones and Ashley Giles.

Well Ern i think it hsould be pretty clear to anyone why he was there when he was not even in the squad, there have been muted rumors about his interference in Flintoff's reign as captain as well, plus divisions in the English Dressing room, its silly to believe in conspiricies but one can add 2+ 2 and with 3 captains in the mix it reeks of something bad.

__________________

This was always going to happen was'nt it. Vaughan has ducked the Ashes loss nicely, keeps his captaincy legend alive, and can now slot back into the captaincy saddle with his reputation intact.
Even if England cop a savaging in the ODI series (on the cards) he will come out O.K as he can point the finger at Fletcher for allowing the ODI team to degenerate in his absence.
He is as much a winner as the Aussies in this series i think.

__________________
The thought police are everywhere..............

V. Good assesment Seamer... always the strategist... Vaughns thinking does have devious logic doesnt it ?

__________________

Vaughans been Englands best Captain since Brierly and won the ashes yet people want to keep Flintoff who I dont think is Captain Material and has one nothing plus how long with his ankle is he going to play on for ? England need Vaughans extra bit of captaincy talent plus if he can get his batting back to the last Ashes in OZ he will be a big asset

...and whose fault is that? One day I think you'll accept that Flintoff just isn't a good captain and the Ashes loss may have had something to do with him. It's not Michael Vaughan's fault and you really are clutching at a small number of very thin straws here!

Vaughan is still the England captain. Flintoff is standing in for him while he isn't playing. The debate is whether Vaughan will be fit to play and if he is he automatically takes over the captaincy no matter how well Flintoff or Strauss have done.