View Full Version : Fletcher defends selections
From Cricinfo
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ausveng/content/current/story/271391.html
Defiant Fletcher blames batsmen
Andrew Miller
December 6, 2006
http://img.cricinfo.com/spacer.gif
Duncan Fletcher was in a defiant mood on the morning after England's disastrous defeat in the second Test at Adelaide, insisting that England's batsmen were to blame for the collapse of their Ashes prospects, and not the defensive team selection that had allowed Australia to dictate terms in the closing stages of the game.
"We lost that match in that hour, hour-and-a-half, yesterday morning," Fletcher told reporters at the team hotel in Adelaide, prior to their departure for Perth. "We put ourselves under a little pressure. The first two wickets were unnecessary, and when KP [Kevin Pietersen] got out, a large part of our batting had gone. If we had batted well there and continued in a real positive vein, who knows what could have happened."
Positivity has not been a watchword of England's team make-up in this series, however, and Fletcher's position as coach is under greater scrutiny than ever before. Several former captains have pointed the finger at the team's selection, including his old ally Nasser Hussain (http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ausveng/content/story/271385.html). "He will come under the immense pressure in the next week or so," Hussain told The Evening Standard. "His selections have let him down and let England down in [Ashley] Giles and [Geraint] Jones."
Part of Fletcher's success as a coach in his seven-year tenure has been his ability to absorb the flak on the occasions when things have gone wrong, but on this occasion, he chose to share the buck with his beleaguered captain, Andrew Flintoff, who - to judge from his dodgy ankle, dreadful dismissal and thousand-yard post-match stare - has got more than enough issues to worry about.
"I'm not the sole selector on tour," Fletcher reiterated on at least four occasions. "I'm not the one who says: 'right, this is what we'll go in with'. Out here it's like it's been for the last four or five years, which have been pretty successful. The captain and coach finalise the side for each Test match, and do I stand by the selections? Of course we stand by those selections. I've got to stand by those selections as part of the selection committee.
"Andrew and I have the final say," he confirmed, adding that the mysterious selection committee didn't include David Graveney or any of the home selectors, but instead consisted of a panel of senior players - Andrew Strauss, Paul Collingwood and Jones - who are consulted prior to each Test. Given that Jones, who does not currently have a central contract, is one of the most contentious choices on this tour already, it is a further sign that Shane Warne was spot on in his pre-series assessment, when he claimed that Fletcher has his "favourites".
And those favourites certainly do not include Monty Panesar, whose continued omission from the Test team has created waves of indignation from England's disgruntled fans. "I'm sure there's a lot of anger," Fletcher said, "but I could have taken the easy option with the other players on the selection committee. We've got to sit down and say what do we think is the best side, with all the knowledge we've got around, within that group of people. What is the best side to win the Test match?"
http://img.cricinfo.com/spacer.gif
Fletcher also defended James Anderson's retention in the side, despite his current series figures of 2 for 303. "Andrew Flintoff was talking about how he wanted to go back to the seamers on a skiddy wicket," Fletcher said. "When we played South Australia, Jimmy was the best bowler there. He was more impressive than the spinner and that's why we picked him for Brisbane ahead of [Sajid] Mahmood. When you bowled on the main square, not the rough, it didn't turn. Skiddy bowlers was the way to go. We had to pick him for Brisbane, because he was the most economical at that stage, and he's bowled well here already."
The folly of entering such a marquee series with just one fully match-fit bowler in Matthew Hoggard was exposed by England's inability to polish off Australia's tail on the fourth day, but Fletcher turned that situation around to highlight once again the importance of a No. 8 who can score Test runs. "At 376 for 6 Australia were pretty vulnerable, but Warne's hundred [partnership] put the pressure back on us," he said.
There will inevitably be calls for his resignation if England cannot turn their fortunes around at Perth, starting next Thursday, but Fletcher insisted he still had the backing of his team. "I've never had long-term views," he said. "I'll sit and have a look at it and see if I feel comfortable with myself, that's the most important thing. If you don't feel comfortable with yourself, you've got a problem. If you feel comfortable you can contribute, that's the most important thing.
And despite the massive odds that are stacked against England, Fletcher still believed his team could emulate Don Bradman's men in 1936-37 and become only the second side in Ashes history to come back from 2-0 down. "Anytime we play against Australia it's a huge challenge," he said. "It was a huge challenge last year, and it's a huge challenge this winter. But we play sport for that. We might as well not pitch up if we didn't believe we could come back."
--------------------------------------
How the hell is Jones part of the selection panel OMG :eek:
The Reaper
6 Dec 2006, 16:51
Read will be pissed that his rival is a selector
davey_magik
6 Dec 2006, 17:06
I am stunned that they wouldn't have say Flintoff, Strauss and another senior player like Hoggard.
That is ridiculous that Jones is there, and if they don't pick Monty Fletcher should be given the boot. In fact he should be given the boot anyway, the guy is terrible.
Also they should drop Anderson for Mahmood, Mahmood has at least showed he can take regular wickets.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
6 Dec 2006, 17:07
By reading that i get the impression that Giles and Anderson will be selected again, as well as Jones.
Surely Fletcher will not go with an unchanged team into the Perth test.
Thoughts??
Oh When the Saints
6 Dec 2006, 17:11
That just makes me laugh ... was Fletcher trying to live up to his stereotype?
Fair dinkum.
Cripes.
No ********ing way the English can win this series with that buffoon in charge.
Cooldude
6 Dec 2006, 17:47
Sure, defensive selections didn't lose them the match, but those selections sure as hell wiped out England's chances of winning the match
So Jones wil never be dropped obviously.
Coin_Toss
6 Dec 2006, 19:22
By reading that i get the impression that Giles and Anderson will be selected again, as well as Jones.
Surely Fletcher will not go with an unchanged team into the Perth test.
Thoughts??
I share your thoughts and agree what others are saying. I nearly fell out of my chair when I found out Jones was on the panel of senior players, and frankly, that's astonishing. Because it doesn't make sense to me. He should be too busy improving his game to worry about selecting the team.
Thanks for that :D
dan warna
6 Dec 2006, 19:33
teddy dextor>fletcher.
Andrew Strauss, Paul Collingwood and Jones - who are consulted prior to each Test.
Present form and performances aside, I find this extraordinary :confused:
Beltaball
6 Dec 2006, 20:15
Present form and performances aside, I find this extraordinary :confused:
only logical reason (if any) for picking
Stresscothic, jones, giles, vaughan, flintoff (Injured) and any other player that played in the Ashes win in England,, is misdirected Loyalty and emotion.. have to put your best team out ENGLAND Don't,,so they Don't win. Emotion rules for England not reason
funkyfreo
6 Dec 2006, 21:02
For mine if he is worried about the batting fair dinkum he at least has to either bring in Reid for JOnes and keep GIles, or my preferred bring in Monty and keep JOnes.
Actually my preferred is drop Anderson and Giles. Bring in Monty. Bring in Joyce, and go with 3 quicks and an attacking spinner, with KP being a part timer. Why bolster the batting with a crap all rounder - lets bring in a bat.
red+black
6 Dec 2006, 22:08
I'm now coming round to Pidge's 5-0 prediction.
There is no way in hell we will lose a single Test. I'll go for 4-0.
I can't believe Fletcher tries to justify Giles' inclusion and 3 for 262 so far in the series by saying they need a number 8 who can bat.
They won't beat Australia while they're more worried about their tail making runs than taking wickets.
Partridge
7 Dec 2006, 07:10
By reading that i get the impression that Giles and Anderson will be selected again, as well as Jones.
Surely Fletcher will not go with an unchanged team into the Perth test.
Thoughts??
I've got plenty of thoughts about this. Namely that 2 of England's bowlers are not test standard in Giles and Anderson. Their alleged wicketkeeper cannot keep and dropped yet another catch on the final day. Not only would I make 2 changes - Read and Panesar, I'd also bring in Mahmood for Anderson. He could not possibly be any worse.
If England don't do this - and with that fat c**t Fletcher in charge they probably won't - they will not take 20 wickets in any test. They haven't come close so far. They've had 4 cracks at Australia and bowled them out once (for over 500). That's nowhere near good enough.
Anyone fond of the modern obsession with coaches, who also become selectors should look long and hard at the damage Fletcher has done. Australia went through it with Simpson but at least learnt from it.
The Reaper
7 Dec 2006, 08:17
I've got plenty of thoughts about this. Namely that 2 of England's bowlers are not test standard in Giles and Anderson. Their alleged wicketkeeper cannot keep and dropped yet another catch on the final day. Not only would I make 2 changes - Read and Panesar, I'd also bring in Mahmood for Anderson. He could not possibly be any worse.
If England don't do this - and with that fat c**t Fletcher in charge they probably won't - they will not take 20 wickets in any test. They haven't come close so far. They've had 4 cracks at Australia and bowled them out once (for over 500). That's nowhere near good enough.
Anyone fond of the modern obsession with coaches, who also become selectors should look long and hard at the damage Fletcher has done. Australia went through it with Simpson but at least learnt from it.
bring in Plunkett for harmless as well
Ray Nolan
7 Dec 2006, 08:30
If that's the selection panel we are screwed & will struggle to win a Test.
TheColeTrain
7 Dec 2006, 09:11
What a joke that man is. ********ing hell, why the hell is a hack wicketkeeper, the grade pro on their selection panel?
Just like to thank the fat prick for ruining the most anticipated series in Australia for quite some time because of his stupidity and arrogance.:thumbsd:
That'd be like having Martyn on the Aussie panel.... this is truly amazing- how can a guy who was dropped in the summer for poor form be part of the selection process?
Which idiot in the ECB allowed this process to take place? Who did the selection this past summer in the home series?
a big thank you for these guys handing the little urn back to the rightful owners....
That'd be like having Martyn on the Aussie panel.... this is truly amazing- how can a guy who was dropped in the summer for poor form be part of the selection process?
Which idiot in the ECB allowed this process to take place? Who did the selection this past summer in the home series?
a big thank you for these guys handing the little urn back to the rightful owners....
The English selectors selected the side over in England this summer. All selectors wanted Read, so fat Dunc had to yield.
However the Selectors haven't travelled over, so therefore Fat Dunc can do what he likes. Including putting the Club Pro on the selection panel so he can't be dropped.
Freo Big Fella
7 Dec 2006, 10:19
Duncan the dunce
7th December 2006, 10:00 WST
Former England captains have blamed coach Duncan Fletcher’s poor team selections for their dire Ashes predicament.
Nasser Hussain and Ian Botham demanded Fletcher wield the axe for the third Test, starting at the WACA Ground on Thursday, after his faith in spinner Ashley Giles and wicketkeeper Geraint Jones backfired.
Hussain said Fletcher’s selections had let England down.
“He will come under immense pressure in the next week or so,” Hussain said.
“His selections have let him down and let England down in Giles and Jones. There have been no runs and no wickets and Giles dropped a crucial catch.
“The coach has got to get his thinking cap on and work out how to get 20 wickets.”
Botham also criticised Fletcher’s selections, asking why Monty Panesar, who Fletcher hailed as the best finger spinner in the world earlier this year, was sitting on the sidelines after being left out of the first two Tests as England opted for Giles.
“Is Monty Panesar here or has he gone home?” Botham said after Australia took a 2-0 lead in the five-Test series with a spectacular six-wicket win in Adelaide.
“I am not taking anything away from Australia, they have been magnificent, but we have two players who have hardly played any cricket in a year — Jimmy Anderson and Ashley Giles — two key bowlers.”
Fletcher defended the make-up of the England side, saying timid batting rather than cautious selection was to blame for England’s capitulation in Adelaide.
He admitted there was anger in England at the decision to overlook Panesar, a non-selection considered evidence of an overtly defensive English outlook in this Ashes series.
“Remember at this stage that I am not the sole selector on this tour,” Fletcher said yesterday.
“From our point of view, sure there is a lot of anger (at Panesar’s non-selection).
“I’m not the one who just says ‘right, this is what we are going with’.
“A discussion took place and we, as a selection panel, thought that was the best side to win that Test match.”
Fletcher said he and Flintoff had the final selection say after consulting Andrew Strauss, Paul Collingwood and Jones.
Alec Stewart, who captained England in Australia in 1997-98, blasted the under-performing bowling attack.
“Flintoff and (Matthew) Hoggard have caused Australia problems but Steve Harmison has taken one wicket in two Tests while both Giles and Anderson have struggled,” Stewart said.
A downcast Geoff Boycott, who warned Australia could now bury England over the remainder of the series, called on Flintoff and Jones to start contributing with the bat.
“The batsmen are making too many mistakes,” he said.
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=14
Whilst it's a pretty pathetic cop-out from Fat Dunc, the underlined bit truly astounded me.
How can a junior player who's position in the team is tenuous at best have any say in selection?
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=286767
Freo Big Fella
7 Dec 2006, 10:21
Oops. Feel free to delete this mods.
The English selectors selected the side over in England this summer. All selectors wanted Read, so fat Dunc had to yield.
However the Selectors haven't travelled over, so therefore Fat Dunc can do what he likes. Including putting the Club Pro on the selection panel so he can't be dropped.
OK, but surely there could be a phone call from England to Australia telling Fat Dunc to get his finger out and do something. I mean, the English team DOES have global communications, don't they?
Who are the English selectors, by the way (back in England, not Fat Dunc and his Faves.....
OK, but surely there could be a phone call from England to Australia telling Fat Dunc to get his finger out and do something. I mean, the English team DOES have global communications, don't they?
Who are the English selectors, by the way (back in England, not Fat Dunc and his Faves.....
You would think so and they probably do ask Fat Dunc to play Read and Monty, but I guess they can't fill out the team sheet. Don't know why they wouldnt send out at least 1 selector
Fletcher got too much credit for the Ashes success last year and is probably copping too much stick for the failings this time.
Partridge
7 Dec 2006, 12:00
Fletcher got too much credit for the Ashes success last year and is probably copping too much stick for the failings this time.
If Fletcher is responsible for Giles, Jones and Anderson being in the team - which everyone strongly suspects - he deserves all the criticism he gets. It's against all logic to include those 3 clowns. We all said it wouldn't work before the series started and have been proved 100% correct. If we can spot it surely the England management can as well?
Freo Big Fella
7 Dec 2006, 12:04
OK, but surely there could be a phone call from England to Australia telling Fat Dunc to get his finger out and do something. I mean, the English team DOES have global communications, don't they?
Who are the English selectors, by the way (back in England, not Fat Dunc and his Faves.....
Dave Graveney is chairman, don't know the others.
Grimreepah
7 Dec 2006, 12:06
the mysterious selection committee didn't include David Graveney or any of the home selectors, but instead consisted of a panel of senior players - Andrew Strauss, Paul Collingwood and Jones - who are consulted prior to each Test.
That is ridiculous. Surely this can't be true.
Punt_Road_Roar
7 Dec 2006, 12:13
I wonder if Fletcher is going to release a new book about how England lost the Ashes after this series is done?
:thumbsu: :D
I think we're all being a bit disrespectful here.
Remember its Duncan Fletcher OBE :rolleyes:
If Fletcher is responsible for Giles, Jones and Anderson being in the team - which everyone strongly suspects - he deserves all the criticism he gets. It's against all logic to include those 3 clowns. We all said it wouldn't work before the series started and have been proved 100% correct. If we can spot it surely the England management can as well?
Giles - how many young spinners have their careers ruined or set-back by a tour to Australia? Australia tends to eat them up and spit them out.
Panesar might have been different but they might have thought that about Richard Dawson.
Jones - has not disgraced himself. Keeping better than he did in the Ashes. Has not starred with the bat. Was a split hair decision between he and Read. Would England have won either match with Read instead of Jones?
Anderson - the other choices were Mahmood and Plunkett. Not exactly superstars knocking on the door of Test selection. Another split hair decision. At least they didn't choose a 7th batsman instead (as some people wanted) which may have meant Flintoff being bowled into the ground even more than currently is the case.
No-one could seriously say that those 3 selection decisions cost England 2 Test matches. Clearly, hindsight says that 2 of those 3 decisions may have been wrong but at the time they were justifiable. I just think that Botham and co are having a shot at the easy target.
I prefer to dwell on the brilliant cricket played by the Australians and the fact that, bar 1 or 2, the English players have either failed or have been very inconsistent. They are the real reasons England are 2-0 down.
My point is that Fletcher wasn't the cricketing genius behind the triumphant 2005 Ashes nor the evil architect of the disaster of 2006.
Ray Nolan
7 Dec 2006, 12:45
Mahmood over Anderson was a no-brainer given Anderson was injured most of the summer & played only a few weeks for Lancashire whereas Saj starred with the ball against Sri Lanka & Pakistan.
Read being dropped had nothing to do with his form & all to do with Jones being on the selection panel (I still can't get over that!)
As for Giles - same situation as Anderson, no Cricket for a year and he gets picked over a guy who starred away in India & against Sri Lanka & Pakistan at home (all top nations when it comes to playing spin).
Each selection was mind numbingly stupid.
eddiesmith
7 Dec 2006, 13:18
Why are people shocked at Collingwood? He is possibly our most senior player
Ray Nolan
7 Dec 2006, 13:34
Why are people shocked at Collingwood? He is possibly our most senior player
In terms of Test Cricket he's not. As good as he is there is no way he should be a selector. It would make as much sense to have Ian Bell as a selector.
TheColeTrain
7 Dec 2006, 13:40
Giles - how many young spinners have their careers ruined or set-back by a tour to Australia? Australia tends to eat them up and spit them out.
Panesar might have been different but they might have thought that about Richard Dawson.
You don't not play somebody because they might fail, and FWIW Giles has failed many times, his a bowler and yet he doesn't spin it and has a career average of over 40. There is no possible way to defend the selection of Giles other then Fletcher is a useless piece of crap.
Why are people shocked at Collingwood? He is possibly our most senior player
Yeah, he has such VAST test experience....
Nothing against the slopster as such, but why should any player apart from the captain (and he should have a reasonably small role, IMO) be picking the team? Fraught with all sorts of problems, not least the selecting of mates or keeping oneself in the team when you should not be part of the team.
Not that I'm complaining- if the Poms want to flush their team down the toilet, good on 'em....just make sure that urn stays with the Aussies this time. We've bloody well earned the chance to look at the real thing for a few years, not some bloody crystal replica!
Just kidding....but not with the selection policy....
Duncan Fletcher is a dichead. Fat pommy b**tard.
Partridge
7 Dec 2006, 13:51
Giles - how many young spinners have their careers ruined or set-back by a tour to Australia? Australia tends to eat them up and spit them out.
Panesar might have been different but they might have thought that about Richard Dawson.
That's the kind of thinking that England did NOT show last year. By that rationale they would have thought "We can't play Kevin Pietersen, remember what happened to Ben Hollioake". They didn't - they backed a guy with genuine ability to perform and were rewarded. That's exactly what they should have done with Panesar. Besides, the alternative - Giles - has never threatened against Australia. They expect a guy the wrong side of 30 to suddenly turn into a matchwinner? Don't think so somehow.
As far as Jones goes, I'm afraid I think differently to cricket selectors - I want the best possible wicketkeeper. Is that Jones or Read?
eddiesmith
7 Dec 2006, 14:00
In terms of Test Cricket he's not. As good as he is there is no way he should be a selector. It would make as much sense to have Ian Bell as a selector.
He is our 2nd oldest and 2nd most experienced International player, Bell is one of the youngest and has alot less experience, poor comparison
Joffaboy
7 Dec 2006, 14:03
Duncan Fletcher is a dichead. Fat pommy b**tard.
Not a pommy - African of some de plume.
Grimreepah
7 Dec 2006, 14:04
Why are people shocked at Collingwood? He is possibly our most senior player
Collingwood has only played 17 Test matches.
If Trescothick and Vaughan were fit, I don't think he would even be in your best 11. Not when the series started at least.
He is our 2nd oldest and 2nd most experienced International player, Bell is one of the youngest and has alot less experience, poor comparison
umm...
Freddie
Hoggard
Harmless
Strauss
and yes, even Bell
have more TEST experience than Slopster, I think.
Mickey Mouse cricket doesn't count here, ed- this is where boys become men.
Why are people shocked at Collingwood? He is possibly our most senior player
Fletcher blamed his timid batting for losing the second test. ;)