Michael Vaughan says:
“As a team and players, we had a lot of self-belief that we could turn things around, and we also have a lot of self-belief we can do very well in the World Cup come 2007 – that is when we will be judged.”
Bollocks. The World Cup in 2007 doesn’t matter much. It’d be a nice bonus to win it, but that’s all. England’s cricketers will be judged by sensible people (i.e. me, and people who think like me) far more by how they perform against Pakistan and India this Winter, against India and Sri Lanka next Summer, and, above all, in the Ashes series of 2006-7 in Australia.Actually, I like Michael Vaughan a lot. He bats well, and is incapable of disguising his mood when he’s on telly.
I still think we should have a Twenty:Twenty world cup, though, played over a week or so with each country playing twice a day. That’d be fun.
Can it possibly be true, as my copy of last year’s Wisden that my mum gave me last week suggests, that the West Indies aren’t touring England again until 2010? That’s disgraceful.
Presumably one of the issues facing the selectors for the Winter tour is to find ways of including Ian Bell and Geraint Jones in the squad — since it’d be tricky to drop players who featured in all five Ashes Tests — but then come up with excuses not to play them in the Test Matches, so their replacements can be settled in the side in good time for next Summer’s Tests? We really shouldn’t be playing people who look like twelve year-olds in the side, especially when they aren’t good enough at what it is that they are supposed to be doing. Maybe when they’re bigger.