Why England should not enter the ICCCT 2006

[Zainub]

Now Common OF, I know it means a lot to win and subsequently retain the Ashes, it's probably the biggest priority for England fans, but I do think the World Cup is also some where in the big picture in Duncan Fletcher's eyes. And England have only 30 odd games in between now and the beginning of their campaign in 2007, you want to cut down the practice even further?

I sometimes get a bit fed of the obsession with England fans wanting to make sure their important players aren't over done, it's not like England are the only team who have important players, neither is it the case that only England have to play too much cricket. Australia, I reckon probably play more, and yet manage to get around without half as much as complaining England are on and about all the time.

[Vrock]

I think that England should play in the ICCCT games, if you play for your country you want to play as much as possible and do what ever you can to play. Also people have said that they would like to see Freddie rested for the series in Pakistan, what would be the difference in resting him for ICCCT if we go through them. So he can be rested for the series in Oz?

[Collyisamackem]

It's not a bad competition, there's just too much cricket being squashed into the calendar. You can't argue the Champions Trophy is bigger than the Ashes, which is why we need to preserve the Ashes as a contest by not flattening the players.

[Zainub]

Well Colly, Australia I bet are no less determined to win back the Ashes then England are to retain them, no Aussie fan has yet stated his desire to see Australia opt out of the ICC CT sighting reasons of fatigue, or have they? Will the Aussie players not 'flatten' as you say, or are you trying to say England are more vulnerable to fatigue, just because they are England?

[Collyisamackem]

Now you're putting suggestions in my mouth. Did I especially refer to England? No. I believe that the Aussies could well be more flattened than us but I don't want to see that. Do you really think that kind of itinary is a good thing for cricket?

I don't like the idea of opting out because it could be a good competition, I just wish it was better scheduled. We have a few players pushing for ODI places so maybe we could change the side around a bti to protect those who play both tests and ODIs. I don't see that as weakening the team at all, just trying out players who could go on to have the kind of starts that Kevin Pietersen has had.

[Zainub]

Sorry I presumed you were referring to England only Colly, my mistake that. I don't always like the scheduling of the all of ICC's events, but opting out would be an elitist approach that I would condemn and disapprove of, there isn't really a better time to hold the event, is there? The time when all major teams are free are limited, I think in this case at least, the ICC has done the best it can. I like blaming home boards for cramped tours. I don't mind home boards asking teams to play in far flung areas, and I don't mind long tours either, but I do mind short 2 gaps between tests, or 5 tests crammed into 44 days, that doesn't help either the home or the away side. I think we were always on the same wavelength from the start, but I misinterpreted your comments and jumped on the bandwagon a bit to quickly. I must apologise, Colly.

[Collyisamackem]

Oh no worries Zainub, none at all.

[Zainub]

Good to know that, Colly. You know, one of the reasons why I actually like this tournament (despite having a general aversion for multi nation tournaments apart from the World cup, like Asia Cup, VB Series, Nat West Series etc etc) is because this is the only tournament Australia haven't won

[Occasional Fan]

Originally Posted by Ninjaman

The last time England played Australia in Asutralia, there was an ICC Champions Trophy just before the tour started.

That's as may be, but it wasn't as late as it is in 2006 - the Ashes series started some two weeks earlier and was therefore much more spread out than it will be next year.

[Occasional Fan]

Originally Posted by Zainub

I do think the World Cup is also some where in the big picture in Duncan Fletcher's eyes.

It is. And in my opinion it shouldn't be.

Originally Posted by Zainub

And England have only 30 odd games in between now and the beginning of their campaign in 2007, you want to cut down the practice even further?

Yes, if it puts test match performance at risk, which I believe it does.

As I said above, there is just far too much one-day cricket being played for my liking. I see no value in the ICCCT at all for the senior nations. Even to ODI enthusiasts, the big prize is surely the World Cup. Why not preserve its status as a premier championship and use the ICCCT as a development ground for the associate members and the A teams of the senior nations? Like Collyisamackem, my concern is not specific to England. I'm worried for the good of the test match level of the game as played by all the senior nations. That said, it certainly is up to Australia to determine for themselves, maybe with the input of their supporters, whether or not they play in the ICCCT: I'm not going to advise them as I will England.