Michael Vaughan Steps Down As Captain. Thoughts?

Question

I'm actually a little surprised and shocked. I thought he would have stayed on until at least the Ashes series. He may not be getting runs but he's still a relatively good tactician, I thought he'd have done a Mike Brearly and stayed on just for his captaincy (but I guess you really can't do that).

I guess it's the right thing to do though, and I commend him not only for being a great captain but also making this decision, which is a good one in the long run. It'll take the burden of having to carry captain off the rest of the team, and England will now be able to make a fresh start and hopefully usher in a new era.

Paul Collingwood has also steped down as ODI captain.

Do you think it was their decision alone? What are your thoughts and who do you think will be the next captain?

Answer 1

Not going to try and match the length of some of the answers , can only type with two fingers !!!

Undoubtably it is the right time to step down , he cannot buy a run at the moment and the side needs a bit of stability when the first wicket goes down , which it just is not getting . He has done a good job but will need to achieve a lot more now to ever pull on an England shirt again.

Surprised at Colly , misplaced loyalty I feel....

Answer 2

He is taking the blame for the team.  It is admirable but so unwise.  England needs him. Vaughn with a better team can win matches.

I hope he makes a comeback

Answer 3

I think he did the right thing, now he may be able to concentrate on his game more.

KooKee, that was quite an answer you gave there, I may read it sometime when I have a day to spare! lol. But I know how devastated you must be.Now you might see a great improvement in his form.I would like to see Freddy back as captain, but I guess that wont happen anytime soon.

Answer 4

great decision by him , everyone has to go, he did a great job for england and he knows what he is doing !

Ian Bell, my choice as he has a cool head over his shoulders and great batter too !

Answer 5

he did rite ... but it will affect 2009 ashes

Answer 6

England lost a series. They lost to a team which is stronger than England. Captain doesn't make a lot of difference. If the team is at 95, he will take it to 100. That's all. England needs to bring in more capable players and nurture talent and retain talent. The way they had sent out Tremlett and Broad was wrong, after their successful performances.

Vaughan going is no surprise. If he had stayed, it would have been a surprise. Now there is only one player who can command his position in ODIs as well as test matches. England captaincy should go to him. It would be poetic justice if South Africa defeating England can bring a South African as English captain. Why not ?  

Answer 7

I am devastated :((

I was shocked, stunned!!! i couldnt believe it! and i still cant believe it.

In my opinion Vaughan has been highly influenced to make this decision. I believe that the ECB knew/reliased that this current set of 12 or 13 players, with this current captain and this current set-up were not good enough to beat Australia next year. So as usual the fall-guy is the captain of England

Vaughan has always stated that it was his ambition to play on to the 2009 Ashes in England and captain this side to victory one more time. England losing to a far superior South Africa side is not the huge deal people are making it out to be. This current England side (as everyone knows) will not be the side that plays in the 2009 Ashes. There is always experimenting going on before any Ashes series, so for an experimental side to lose to (arguarbly) the best side in the world at the moment, is not (as The Oracle said) "Rock Bottom".

England supporters over the last 2 months have annoyed me a great deal. At first there was the odd whisper of people who wanted Micheal Vaughan to go (even after we beat NZ home & away). Then in this current series against South Africa fans have started to go against the England side (which hasnt happened since Hussain was in charge). The so-called best fans in the world, were criticizing the team, instead of getting on the team's side and helping England out of trouble. This cant have helped the team's morale and especially the morale of the most important player out there Michael Vaughan, the fans have always been good to him.

Vaughan said this, which suprised me a lot

"I thought it might be time to go in New Zealand, where my body was working well but my mind was not working well. I will always cherish the support I've had, but this is a weight off my shoulders.

The fact is if Vaughan was questioning his desire, if he was questioning his talent, if he was questioning his abilities to captain England then he should have gone sooner. I hate to say it, but if Vaughan had doubts and fears, then surely this had to come out for his team to see!! and when your captain is questioning his own ability, for one he cant help you with your problems and for two the team morale of the England side must have been at an all-time low.

Vaughan also said

But as England captain I feel I've run out of steam," he added. "I believe that the best thing for the team is to embark on a new direction under a new captain.

This proves that Vaughan's mentality inside the dressing room, cant have been helping the team.

Do i think its the right choice for Vaughan to go?

Yes & No

Yes After hearing how Vaughan was questioning his hunger and desire to captain England then surely he has to go. A new young and hungry captain can take England in the right direction. A new team-morale has to be built. England can go in the right direction with a new captain at the helm.

No because i think Vaughan and England have pressed the panic button way too quickly. The captain quitting (before being pushed) after losing a series to (arguarbly) the best side in the world at the moment does stink of panic.Ok so the captain wasnt happy and England have gone a year now without winning a major series, BUT to start a new regime so close to the biggest series in the world (The Ashes) shows that the ECB & selectors have absolutely NO faith in this current England side winning The Ashes.

The Collingwood departure is a simple one. England wanted a completely "fresh" new start, England needed a captain who would unite the dressing room in both the test & ODI formats. After Collingwood's bad form (in tests) and conduct (against NZ) he wasnt the right man to do it, so obviously he has pushed out of the captaincy. Its a shame because i believe Collingwood was building something special in the ODI's with a good bunch of boys who were hungry to win a World Cup. Colli must feel disappointed because he never had a bad run as ODI captain, i guess he just wasnt good enough.

Will Michael Vaughan ever play for England again?

NO, NO and 3 times NO WAY!

Vaughan at the moment, is in the worst form of his career. Now there's a few reasons for that. First of all the obvious one, he has lost all faith in his abilities with captaining his team and with bat in hand. Second of all he has been played up & down the order for about 2 years now and he has never secured a certain place in the batting order. Vaughan bats best when opening the innings (2002/3 Ashes anyone?) Vaughan IMO is still the best opener in England. BUT Vaughan will not come back into the England side, and here's why historically when players resign as captains of there countries, they NEVER come back. People believe that if an old captain comes back into the side, then he will clash with the current captain in the side, meaning some players will under-value the captains input in the side.

Vaughan is good enough to come back into the England side, form is temporary, class is permanent!! Vaughan (if he shows desire) has the ability to go into the county circuit and merit a place in the England side, BUT will the selectors want him back into the side. NO

There are 4 names, that have a chance to get the England captaincy. Kevin Pietersen, Ian Bell, Andrew Flintoff and Andrew Strauss

Kevin Pietersen- He is the bookies favourite to get the captaincy and he has potential to be a great captain. BUT he would not be my pick.

Reason no.1- Great batsmen who become captain of there country, historically perform worse with the bat when captain. Michael Vaughan for example averaged 50 until he was England captain (now he averages a measly 41) Pietersen currently averages 50, can England afford to lose runs from Pietersen?

Reason no.2- Even though Pietersen, would be an excellent motivator and man-manager. The tactical side of cricket is just as important and because Pietersen has had little (to no) experience captaining his county in 4 day cricket i believe Pietersen is not the right man for the job

Andrew Flintoff- 3 words- too much workload!! Can Flintoff handle the captaincy. The Ashes 2006/07 proved that he couldnt!! Flintoff has never been a master technician and i believe we shouldnt jepordize Fred's career by giving him captaincy

Ian Bell- An outside shot, he is in both the test & ODI squads, he has experience of captaining England (although it was U19) and he has a good reputation in the side. Bell would be a good selection as captain if he can ask for advice from previous captains and maybe toughen up a little more, because Bell has the tendancy to get down, when things are going bad for him

Andrew Strauss- He would need a ODI recall, but again Strauss is a good man to have. He is loved by the players, he has experience of captaining England in a WINNING series! and dont forget he is a handy ODI player so Strauss has a chance

Cook is too young in my opinion, but he will be the next England captain after the new one takes over.

Rob Key, wouldnt be a bad choice (although suprising) he is a man with fresh ideas, and a gung-ho spirit, he has had success with Kent in the past and he could be the man to lead England to success.

Answer 8

Its been too long coming if you ask me.

Michael Vaughan is a good captian but his batting has not been good in recent times.

You also have to give credit to the opposition, sometimes no matter how hard you try, how good you play sometimes the opposition just outclass you.

I belive Michael Vaughan should have resigned a long time ago, you can't keep a player just for their captaincy which have England had been doing for too long with Vaughan, there are other players who can be just as a good as captaning but also being on form with the bat and ball.

I believe Michael Vaughan should carry on playing International Cricket as he is stil young compared to many players who are over 35 who are still playing Internationl Cricket and would give him a fresh thought of mind and not have to worry about being captian but just concentrate on his batting and part-time bowling.

Who ever comes in still should get some advice from Vaughan because of his experience but as i said its been too long coming if you ask me.

Answer 9

I think it is the correct decision for Vaughan to have made. He has been struggling badly with hgis form, and couldn't justify keeping his place in the team as a batsman. This was clearly affecting his captaincy, and it was starting to interfere with his family life.

I don't think he could have been another brearley, and stayed on just for the captaincy. He was appointed captain on the back of being England's best batsman. His form over the years has deteriorated, and has now reached its nadir.

Collingwood stepping down as ODI captain: He hasn't exactly set the world on fire there, and I suspect he has been pushed as England want to unite the two strands, and clearly feel Collingwood isn't the man they want.

Vaughan has made the decision for himself; Collingwood has more than likely been given a helping hand.

I don't think Vaughan will play for England again. He is simply not good enough any more. It is all very well saying if he goes back to county cricket and scores loads of runs he could force his way back in on merit, but before he got into the England side he was hardly the most prolifice scorer in the Championship, but was picked partly on form, and partly on ability, temperament, Fletcher's gut feeling, and potential to develop.

As for his timing: He clearly isn't in a fit state to lead England in the next match. Ideally you would step down at the end of a series, but he has clearly reached rock bottom as a person. I would imagine being England captain is a little bit like being a heroin addict: an addict will only ask for help when they have reached rock bottom. So it is the case with being England captain.

The next captain. The choices are Andrew Strauss, Andrew Flintoff, Paul Collingwood, Rob Key and Kevin Pietersen.

Collingwood we can immediately rule out now he has lost the ODI captaincy. He has only just saved his immediate Test future, so to make him captain would be sheer folly.

Flintoff has led the team before, with mixed success. He sufered from the triple role of key all-rounder, talisman, and captain, which resulted in the unfortunate 4am sea rescue. England won't make that mistake again.

Strauss is another who has led the team before, and quite successfully. The problem with Strauss is that his own position is still fairly tenuous. England will not want to be in the same situation they are now in 12 months time, with a captain so badly out of from that he cannot justify his place in the team.

Key would be an excellent candidate, and probably the one Peter Morres would like to work alongside. With Key he could forge the same relationship he had with Chris Adams at Sussex. A new man, new ideas, and a new sense of purpose for England. Key's problem is that as he has been out of the side for some time, he will immediately have to justify his place in the team.

Pietersen is the most likely candidate for the job. he is England's best player, and will lead from the front. On the downside, he has no leadership skills, but no one works harder than Pietersen does at his own game, and I think he would work just as hard at his captaincy. he would quickly grow into the role, and would lead England with verve and vivacity, which is what England needs.

Edit: And I've had a nightmare of a time answering this question. The first time I did (and the answer was even longer than this mighty tome) when I pressed submit, I kept getting "We're taking a coffee break". Eventually I gave up and started again.

Edit 2: Kookee has inferred that I have said England have reached rock bottom. To clarify: I have not. I have said that Vaughan has reached rock bottom, and is no longer in a fit state of mind to continue captaining England. England themselves are far from rock bottom. I have seen much, much worse from them.

Answer 10

It's a shame, but if he felt that his time had come then it was the right thing to do.

As for his replacement, I hope to god that it wont be Pietersen, fantastic batsman that he is, his form can only suffer if he is made captain.  Andrew Strauss maybe?? has done the job before and with some success, so he is a strong candidate,

Rob Key has been out of the England set up for an awfully long time, could he be the man for the job??  he has done very well with kent as Captain but i wonder if he is good enough at test level?? could his lack of time in the England Set up be his biggest plus point?? after all there will be none of this "jobs for the boys" menatlity that is so prevelant in the current England set up

Ian Bell, a possibility very much like Michael Vaughan with the willow in his hand, im not sure about his technical nouse.

I think Strauss is the best possibilty out of anyone.

my pick for the 4th Test at the Oval

1.   A. Cook

2.   A. Strauss (C)

3.   R. Key

4.   K. Pietersen

5.   P. Collingwood

6.   I.  Bell

7.   J. Foster

8.   A. Flintoff

9.   S. Harmison

10. S. Jones

11. G. Swann

Answer 11

it really surprised me