Why England must forget Michael Vaughan
Perhaps it’s the British way. With an uncertain future in front of us, the tendency to look back upon a remarkable history is understandable.
But it’s funny how selective memories can be, isn’t it? And the clamour to bring back several members of the 2005 Ashes-winning side is particularly hard to understand. While that was a glorious chapter in English cricket history, it is often overlooked that is was largely the same team that were thrashed 5-0 in the Ashes of 2006-2007. Nine of the 11 who played in the first Test in Brisbane had played in the Ashes of 2005.
Yet the media continue to push the claims of those players, somehow forgetting to mention the months of mediocrity that have elapsed since that series.
For a start there is Simon Jones. Jones did, it is true, produce some impressive performances for Worcestershire last year. But he also managed just nine games and, between spells of bowling, limped painfully around the field. He is, at the time of writing, recovering from another knee operation and supposedly a few weeks from resuming bowling. But isn’t he always?
Then there’s Steve Harmison. Since the start of 2007, he has a Test bowling average of 40 and has been tried again and again in the hope that he will recover something he lost many months ago. For the record, he only took nine wickets in the final four Tests of that 2005 series.
How about Andrew Flintoff? He is often characterised as the saviour of England cricket but he hasn’t taken a five-wicket haul or scored a century since 2005. So why is he still seen as a match-winner?
And then there’s Michael Vaughan. Vaughan’s case for a recall is perhaps the most puzzling of all, seeing as it is based on performances that came nearly seven years ago. That and his friendship with influential people in the media.
It’s worth reflecting on Vaughan’s record. He has one score over 50 in his last eight Tests and, since June last year, averages just nine.
Ravi Bopara, by contrast, scored a century in his last Test. And was dropped.
Vaughan’s record from 2005 is interesting, too. Take out his one significant score from that series – 166 – and he averaged less than 18. Nor has Vaughan impressed in county cricket. He hasn’t scored a first-class century for Yorkshire for six years and, in that period, has averaged about 30. Ian Bell, by contrast, has scored 10 centuries and averaged 50. And Vaughan’s a poor fielder.
There’s plenty of talent out there. But unless the England selectors – and the media – embrace it, we’ll continue to limp along with a series of faded stars suffering from dodgy knees, hips and eyesight. Really, if most of that Ashes side of 2005 were racehorses, they’d have been put out to stud years ago. It’s time to move on.
