Simple question, how many more failures in the Championship do we allow Michael Vaughan before we drop him?
IMO had his recent run of form happened to anyone else he would have been dropped a couple of games ago. He has, rightly, been given longer than most to turn his form around due to his undoubted class. If he does not score runs at Taunton next week then I would say he needs to be asked to regain his form outside the 1st team.
This message has been edited by AlexRoberts on Jun 28, 2009 1:55 AM
Just get rid of him, Twenty20 is a big deal now its 2nd on the list, we now don't allow Hoggard to play the one dayers so it looks like he's off, Vaughan has failed again and should go the same way. Lyth to play all the time and bring in a big name oversea's batsman for the long term. I'd get rid of Brophy as well while we're at it.
Exactly Cinder. Clear the decks. Hoggard and Vaughan(we'd have to pay him next year ) would free up big wages. Overseas batter or bowler must be quality, plus quality player from other county ( must recruit , like other teams do) and Davis. Add to Rudolph, Mags ect...
Let's get rid of everyone, burn down Headingley, sell off all the kit, take back the sponsor's cars, disconnect the webcam and broadcast Desperate Housewives, send Stewart Regan off to report on the troubles in Iran, publicly flog Dave Callaghan and parade him naked through the streets of Otley and form a Pool team instead...
These are bad times for Yorkshire Cricket Club. Michael Vaughan has been one of the best batsmen to play for Yorkshire over the last 25 years (name me a better one who isn't Australian). He isn't having a good run - none of our players are at the moment - but this isn't the time to be discarding one of our few quality players.
Vaughan should be no where near a one day team till he's proved himself .... BUT his replacement should be Balance, Lyth etc. As has been said Yorkshire means something to us members & the day we go down the Notts route is the day that Yoekshire County Cricket Club as we know it dies
Steve - I appreciate that Vaughan is/was one our best talents but I was looking for opinions on how long do we give him before he should be dropped. Do you suggest we play him all season even if he contiues to average 15-20 runs per innings just because of his past achievements? We have the very talented (IMO) Lyth waiting in the wings, who to be honest, really deserved a 1st XI place at the start of the season. He has the quality for a long and successful career in the first class game (or even higher).
Personally speaking, watching Michael's decline since he returned to the team last season has not made good viewing and I'm not quite sure what he himself must be thinking.......I was hoping that he could get back to form but here we are in almost July and matter's are not improving......sadly, I feel it's time for him to step down.
It feel's like the batting order has been built around him going in at number 3 and this has caused the rest problems.
I do feel that this is the perfect opportunity now after the defeat at Grace Road for Moxon/McGrath to tell one of the younger players that this is their chance to work and hard and bat in the top 5 for the remainder of the season.
I think this article sums up very clearly what many of us are thinking. Just how long can Vaughan continue to be selected for Yorkshire in the hope that a recovery in his form is just around the corner.When he talked at the end of last season about how all he had to do was score big runs for Yorkshire and he would be back in business for this years Ashes,I felt he had no real grasp of the situation.He was deluding himself then and sadly things are no better now.If he is selected for Taunton,and I would think it's somewhat doubtful,then he must deliver or it will simply p*** the youngsters like Lyth,Ballance and Root off completely.Sorry Michael,but it's time to go.
What's Percy Holmes syndrome?
I'm not suggesting we pick Michael indefinitely.
I think he'll know when to step down, and i appreciate that he needs to find some form sooner rather than later.
Between 1913 and 1933, Percy Holmes played in 485 matches (699 innings, scoring 60 First Class Centuries for Yorkshire at an average of 41.65, but he was now 46 years old and in recent years had been tormented with "lumbago".
The YCCC committee decided, given his back trouble and his declining performances with the bat, that they would not renew his contract.
All hell was let lose in the way which is only possible when Yorkshire members disagree with the YCCC Committee and a vote of "no confidence" was sought. The argument was that this was no way to treat a long-serving and high-achieving player.
Whether, Percy would have known that the time had come to retire, I do not know, but the decision was made for him.
Between 1993 and the end of last season, Michael Vaughan had played in 146 games (260 innings), scoring 20 First Class hundreds for YCCC at an average of 36.63, but in recent years he has been tormented by a series of injuries.
The ECB decided, that despite his injury record and his declining performances, to award him a further Central Contract and leave him to re-find his form by playing for YCCC, trusting that injuries were now a thing of the past. He has not re-found is form, and worryingly, there is some evidence to suggest that his injuries are not necessarily a thing of the past.
Whether, or not, Michael will know when to retire is one thing. YCCC should pick its team on merit and not on the basis of loyalty to a player who at the age of 35 in October, has a long injury record and is certainly in decline as a player.
When the time comes to reconsider Michael's future contractual arrangements with Yorkshire the decision is for YCCC to make and not Michael Vaughan.
Well said and intelligently constructed.
I can't fault your argument, but I hope that Michael has a bit more self awareness than Mr Holmes - I suspect he also has considerably more varied and lucrative future career options.
(Just off to order some Vaughan Must Stay T shirts...)
If this is true (and I suspect it is as several websites are running with the story) then this is an admirable decision by Vaughan and a measure of the man. Holmes syndrome successfully avoided.
The timing for Vaughan is sensible with the various media work available with the Ashes starting next week.
I would like to thank Vaughan for his contribution the cricket in general over the years, he has certainly been an excellent role model for young cricketers and non cricketers alike. I am sure there will be many tributes in the media over the coming days which will sum up everybodies feelings much more elegantly than I ever could. I wish him all the best for the future whatever it may hold.
I will look forward to the autobiography in time for Christmas.
P.S. I hope this thread did not have too much influence on his decision.
Where's the part that he can't bat anymore? the thing about the structure of our game is that it is all geared towards International level and the County scene comes second, for me its always the opposite and I for one Im glad he's going because he can't bat anymore and this you could argue has cost us a Twenty20 quarter final place.
The best ever England captain, a truly great player and he retires at the best time with the Ashes media work beckoning. His fantastic stroke play will be missed and very best wishes to him in the future - he has been a great ambassador for the game and a wonderful role model.
I am writing this post with great sadness for two reasons:-
1. The retirement of MV. He has been a great cricketer for Yorkshire and England. Sadly the last year has not been great but I for one will never forget him at his glorious best with the best drive in cricket.
2. The quality of posting on this site has fallen dramatically in recent weeks as evidenced by some of the contributions above. Whilst I value all opinions and enjoy a lively debate, it helps if the posters concerned actually express a sensible argument with some real positive comments. Sadly far too many of recent contributors are just very negative and sadly seem to have a limited knowledge of cricket. (If I'm wrong I apologise, but suggest that they demonstrate in their posts rather than what curently appears.) I do not agree with many of the points made on this forum, but until recently have always at least been able to understand the point of view and respect it. Sadly that is not now the case
A wonderful player;for me, the most attractive England batsman in the last thirty years. Some of his trademark strokes will stay in my mind for the rest of my life.
I hope that at some time in the near future, Michael can give something more to Yorkshire cricket. His tactical acumen will be wasted in the Sky Studio. How much Yorkshire would benefit from his input in the next two or three difficult years ahead.
(Maybe someone at the Club has already sounded him out - maybe not!)
Classy batsman, great/lucky captain, nice chap, eccentric artist - for England perhaps, but his performances for Yorkshire throughout his career have been, overall, frankly mediocre - 36 average does not justify all of the eulogies we will no doubt have to suffer over the next few days. Vaughan should be bracketed with Willis and Gower et al - the county championship was a mere inconvenience on the way to the international game.
Yorkshire have bent over backwards to assist his optimistic dreams of an England recall, but to our own detriment - Rudolph opening has been a disaster - so we've been carrying two lame ducks for most of the season.
I'd like to thank Vaughan for all the pleasure he has brought to so many people, and thank him even more for quitting at the right time (I wouldn't mind if he signed for Lancashire for the next couple of seasons). Hopefully Yorkshire will have the sense to use his undoubted talents in a coaching capacity.
He has been a class batsman for England but his inclusion in the Yorkshire team this season hasn't done the batting line up any favours. As one poster has already mentioned Rudolph has been played as an opener to disastrous effect and Vaughan's inclusion has also cost one of the upcoming batsmen (Lyth possibly) a decent chance.
I actually thought Vaughan had much to offer Yorkshire this season but it isn't working out like that. If he retires now it could be for the best for all concerned.
As for Hoggard leaving, I hope Yorkshire do everything they can to keep him. The quick bowling seems very weak at the minute and Hoggy should be used to both plug the holes there and to help bring some of the other quicks through. To me it's Rana that needs replacing with a decent international bowler.
When Darren Lehmann retired he was asked why he had decided to do so.
He responded that he would rather leave with people asking, "Why is he going?" rather than them asking "Why doesn't he go?"
Some will see Vaughan's attempts to regain his fitness and form as a courageous battle with adversity and some of me certainly admires the determination he showed in coming back from serious injury again and again.
However, it is undeniable that his presence in the YCCC team this summer, particularly his batting at number 3, has had all sorts of damaging effects on team performance.
Personally, I would not want to see a former player who for many years has been more of an "absentee landlord" than a real presence in Yorkshire cricket, involved in the future development of the club.
The time has come to shake the dust from the sandals and move on.
From the YP: "The Yorkshire batsman is poised to accept a lucrative broadcasting contract to cover the Ashes series that starts in eight days' time."
So it seems like a financial decision as much as much as a form or playing decision. Vaughan has always been a good businessman. I don't think loyalty to Yorkshire came into the decision at all.
He will be missed, but the time was right. (Not to mention the lucrative commentary job that was coming up for the Ashes)
Now Yorkshire need to set about saving their season, and Vaughnie was not only out-of-form but was disrupting the batting lineup and preventing younger, and more deserving players from getting in the matches.
I would think both Moxon and McGrath are very relieved. Neither appeared to have the bottle to drop Vaughn and do what was best for the team, so Vaughan has saved them the trouble and further embarrassment.
I was always a huge Vaughan fame, but he'd overstayed his welcome and was holding team progress up.
Inevitable really,given the circumstances.
The SKY offer has been on the table for a long time,and always likely to be accepted once it was clear his International career was over,and The Ashes beckoned.
The finest International batsman around for a couple of years and a consideable contribuor to England as batsman and captain.
I'll leave it to others who know far more of him than I to assess his Yorkshire career.
East Riding Tyke,the nature of such a message board as this is that many will express a view,a few with significant knowledge and insight,others witH only a scant understanding of the facts and some obviously based on complete ignorance.
Rather than berate those whose views appear without subsatnce.as a contributor it should be up to you tot ryand maintain the standard you demand by informing,educating and encouraging those who may not have your deep grasp of the situation.
Critiscism of any views,however bizarre they appear,is not helpful,and however frustrated you may feel,it's better to offer some understanding rather than be dismissive.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion,even one tht suggests that Michael Vaughan was a GREAT Yorkshire batsmen.
I,ve no doubt many on here would violently disagree with you,and cite him as an underperformer,but that is the nature of debate,and for you to expound those views by detailing his contribution to Yorkshire cricket.
A first-class average for Yorkshire of 36 and a mere 20 centuries together with a List A average of barely 30 hardly suggests a GREAT player,and only a few wickets and not a great many catches would suggest on statistics alone,only perhaps a very good player.
Scoreboard not working today, web-cam not working either. No announcement re Vaughan, Vaughan annoyed as DT leaked the announcement, YCC annoyed because no one informed them, and hundreds of spectatators pissed off who attended today hoping to see MV`s last innings. Everyone comes out of this affair with egg on their faces. What an absolute cock-up by the DT, the ECB who are now going to make the announcement on Tuesday and YCC. Probably about 3000 added on to the gate, most of which, I am sure, came specifically to see MV`s last innings, now no one will see it as he will not play again.
According to the news reports, that is what has happened. That upset YCC, who then dropped MV for not informing them of his intentions, so everyone is now most annoyed about the situation.
The Telegraph has for a long time protested that it is a quality paper.
Given its activities in recent months, I am beginning to have my suspicions that it has abandoned whatever "high ground" it once held in a craven search for the sensational - aimed, no doubt, at increasing its flagging circulation.
It is sad, if reports are correct, that YCCC and MV have ended on bad terms due to media agendas!
I think that MV should have informed the club first. That would have been the classy, right and appropriate thing to do. But then again, Yorkshire haven't really been his team for years. Just a finishing school for his England ambitions, I'm afraid.
I doubt Yorkshire would have offered him 50 grand and more besides as a reguar contributor to break the news there first.
Just as SKY seem to have more commentators than they know what to do with, so must the Telegraph have almost more cricket writers than they have pages.
Being a good cricketer doesn't neccessarily make you a good commentator and certainly doesn't make you a great writer but it doesn't seem to matter anymore.
There is something essentially wrong in the relationship between Team England and the counties. And it has not finished with Michael Vaughan.
Currently, YCCC are in the position of MV's peremtory demise, accompanied by the unavailabilty of Rashid (England duty - perhaps), Bresnan (drinks waiter for the England Lions XI), Bairstow and Rafiq because they are due to play in the England Under 19 Test at some distant point in the future.
Magnanimously, Team England are allowing us to field Bairstow at Taunton, but not Rafiq. As neither Bairstow nor Rafiq have contracts with the ECB, surely the said "Team England" should be asking YCCC (and not telling them) what to do with their players (contracted employees).
Where MV is concerned, the fauning subsurvience to Team England and all it stands for has badly damaged YCCC, as it did with both Hoggard and Gough.
I cannot see how it is in Rashid's, Bresnan's, Bairstow's or Rafiq's interests to play for England Lions or England Under 19's, when they could be competing meaningfully in the CC.
Similarly, I cannot see how the development of "Team England" can be best served by the likes of such players, wasting their time-limited careers in second rate and meaningless games played under the auspices of the ECB/Team England.
I think that the point has come where we should tell the ECB/Team England that our player, Azeem Rafiq, will be playing against Somerset at Taunton this week. And invite them to do their worst!
What a mealy mouthed miserable selection of comments - not to mention presumptuous - do you really imagine that an anonymous posting on an insignificant chat forum would have led Michael Vaughan to decide to call a halt to his career?
I know you'll all quote figures and tell me that he never scored the volume of runs for his County that his talent deserved, but his contribution to the reputation and standing of our Yorkshire Cricket was immense. We've all forgotten that he was once ranked the best batsman in the World - on that tour of Australia he played cricket as well as any man I've ever seen. He scored big hundreds, and acquired runs with an elegance and style none of his teammates can even imagine emulating.
More than this, he was a great captain - Engalnd's most successful of all time. And he played for Yorkshire - he was an extraordinairy ambassador for our club on the World stage - and his successes and triumphs reflected on the Yorkshire team and the entire County. have you forgotten the euphoria that gripped the Country in 2005 and the pride we all took in the fact that it was one of our players that made it possible?
Nothing befits his career as much as the manner of his retirement. His decision is the right one - and I'm pleased he was allowed to make it in his own time. I've no idea what happened today , but he should have been allowed to play today - if he wanted to - so that the crowd could pay their respect in the appropriate manner.
I'm quite astounded - and rather embarrassed by some of the views expressed by others on this forum - Michael Vaughan has given me huge pleasure on the cricket field and has always presented himself with enormous dignity and intelligence that does credit to our game.
It feels like the passing of an age and I can only see darkness, commercialism and greed ahead.
If you didn't take pleasure in a Michael Vaughan cover drive then you know nothing about the unique soul of cricket - and sadly you never will.
It is my considered opinion that with the exception of England contracted players, it is the counties who should determine when, where and for whom THEIR players turn out for. And just imagine: Jonathan Bairstow a YORKSHIRE contracted player has been given permission by the ECB to participate in YORKSHIRE'S MATCH against Somerset at Taunton.
Sometimes the way contemporary English cricket is run and administrated leaves me speechless.
I think the press conference will be at Egbaston because all the media will be there with England playing there and the Lions playing the Aussies down the road at Worcester too this week.
As for Vaughan - great player, great captain, great bloke. Ashes winning captain and a test series win in South Africa - how many modern day English captains can have claimed to won one of those as captain nevermind both? Unfortunately his knee troubles have curtailed his career, I think the class was still there, but I don't think he was ever confident he could bat for 4 or 5 hours, perhaps proven in that he looked most comfortable in the 50 over games, he had time to play a substantial innings but wouldn't have to bat for longer than 3 hours.
The test centuries against India in 2002, the Ashes series that followed, the Old Trafford century in 2005 were outstanding.
On a Yorkshire front - the one day hundreds against Somerset in the B&H Q/F in 2001 & Lancashire in the C&G QF in 2004 are the best one day centuries from any Yorkshire player apart from Lehmann that I have seen. Another innings I remember was I think a 88 or 90 against Leicestershire in 2001 B&H group game, Vaughan played a brilliant innings unfortunately then middled a ball but it went straight to point, whoever the fielder was took a blinder of a catch, but nonetheless it was a great innings, the only problem was the rest of Yorkshire's players were terrified by Jimmy Ormond who had a bad knee.
Statistics and averages have never meant a lot to me, I think 18 test centuries (Ramprakash and Hick can only dream, it took Ramprakash ten years to get 2, Vaughan once hit two centuries in the same test) proves class more than an average.
No-one can ever take away from Michael Vaughan his fantastic achievements at International level.
Nor can anyone deny that his record for YCCC is to say the least, underwhelming!
As far as I am concerned, the way International cricet is organised and the ECB runs its affairs, I would do nothing to promote its future.
The ECB and Team England have done enormous damage to County Cricket and continue to do so.
This, after all, is the White Rose Forum, and one would assume that those contributing were primarily concerned with the well-being of YCCC cricket, and not essentially, the "celebrity" cricket and cricketers promoted by the ECB and its acolytes.
The problem with this thread is that since 2002 there have been 2 Michael Vaughans
MV has been a good England batsman & a great captain
As soon as he got into the England team MV has mostly seen playing for Yorks as something that has to be suffered to get back in the England team.
I could give examples ... but today shows everything. Even though Vaughan is currently playing for Yorkshire he informed England that he was quitting ... because he couldn't get back into the England team.
I'm not in the least surprised what's happened ... Vaughan 'defecting' to the Sky box for the Ashes has been 'joked' about at Headingley since May.
The way things are going at the moment Vaughan could officially announce his retirement from first class cricket on tuesday and then play every game for Yorkshire for the rest of the season.
The reason the ECB dishes out orders to the counties is because it dishes out the money.
Without ECB handouts many counties would go under. Even with the lucrative T20, county cricket is barely a self sustaining financial model.
Counties which host England games do pretty well, the rest rely on handouts to survive.
Whether we like it or not most followers of cricket are followers of England. That is shown in the fact that demand in TV rights for England Tests is huge but no broadcaster can even be bothered to pick up the rights for the county championship.
The problem is this system undermines county cricket and perpetuates the cycle. Why watch CC when your team's best young players are told they cant play. It doesn't do the domestic game any favours.
Having Rafiq against Somerset would be a considerable advantage.
First, well done MV for making this decision for himself as it has saved Moxon and Mags from having to do so which i suspect they would have struggled to come to terms with.
Vaughan for me will always be remembered as a great England player and captain rather than for anything he did for Yorkshire. This is a shame but reflective of the modern era with ECB central contracts ruling the way.
I suspect his injury worries are in the back of his mind and he is astute financially to know that retiring now is the best time to maximise his earnings potential with the Ashes just about to start. His call and with his lack of runs and form and an England recall further away than ever then its his prerogative to do so.
i don't think Yorkshire ever quite got it right with MV - was not made skipper when it would have been in the clubs best interests, batted in the wrong position in the order and played in the T20 when its not really his cup of tea.
I hope he will be a welcome addition to the Sky box and listening to him and Atherton would be far more interesting than the outdated Willis, the amateur Colvile and the others like Nass and Beefy who seem to think its dead easy to put right whats wrong with the game in the modern era.
Good luck MV in retirement - one last game would be a nice way to go - especially as we seem to have injury problems, test calls and patently out of form players - one of which is of course MV himself and knowing how things have played out this season, you could see him scoring a ton in his last game...
Thanks Mike for some sterling performances and for giving english cricket the massive kick up the arse that was needed (started by Nass obviously)
I was at Trent Bridge v India, Melbourne and Sydney V Aus and at Old Trafford in the Ashes summer.
I also saw the one day hundreds at Taunton and Old Trafford mentioned previously, and I can honestly say it was a privelage to witness each and every one of them
All the best for the future
Thanks MV for all you have done for English cricket. A truly great player, the best ever England captain and a magnificent stylish batsman. You deserved a better send of than the shambolic happenings yesterday. The DT, YCC and the ECB should be hanging their collective heads in shame the way yesterday was handled. 100`s of spectators were deprived of the opportunity to watch your final innings and send you on your way in the appropriate manner for such a great player. An absolute disgrace that such a fine player, who has done so much for English cricket and Yorkshire, should leave the club under such poor circumstances.
I hardly think its the clubs fault (and for once I agree with Chris waters on this in todays YP)
Why pick a player who is going to announce his retirement to the world on Tuesday but 2 days beforehand has not had the common courtesy to tell his county (not sure I can say employer here as the ECB pays him not YCCC).
He has shown little form and it was as good as a dead rubber anyway (despite the fact we may still qualify for Div 1 of the T20 next season - we really are clinging on to some tenuous reasons for selling games these days).
Sadly the Telegraph and Vaughan should have thought through the consequences of their 'scoop'.
No man is bigger than the county (despite our parlous state)
"Golden knocks: Vaughan's top five Test innings" (Steve Brenkley)
June 29 2009, 12:54 PM
Vaughan's top five Test innings according to Steve Brenkley of the IndependentLink
*Michael Vaughan hit an imperious career-high score of 197 in the second Test against India at Trent Bridge in 2002. During this match he also employed his handy off-spin to good effect bowling the prolific Indian danger man, Sachin Tendulkar.
*In the fourth Test of the 2002 India series, Vaughan once again put his sweet cover drive to good effect, scoring a mighty 195. That year, he amassed 1,481 Test runs, the sixth highest for a calendar year in history.
*Vaughan celebrated another classic knock as he posted 177 against Australia in the second Test of the 2002-03 Ashes series. In 10 Tests played against the Australians, he has struck a hefty 959 runs.
*England were staring at a humiliating Ashes whitewash in that series until Vaughan's majestic 183 helped them to win the final Test in Sydney. Despite the 4-1 defeat, the future captain's three tons ensured he was named Man of the Series.
*Vaughan hit 166 against Australia at Old Trafford in 2005 to gain a vital draw in the third Test of the Ashes series. England won 2-1, their first Ashes success since 1986-87.
Apparently Yorkshire drew the line when Vaughan asked to be able to pick which matches he was to play in. Strange, really. For months he decided where he would bat, and was played despite a string of low scores. Now, they drop him when he's needed the most.
Michael Vaughan is currently a centrally -contracted England player,paid by The ECB,NOT Yorkshire.
With this in mind,he has been playing for Yorkshire this season with the support of The ECB.in an attempt to regain his form and fitness,and gain selection for The Ashes squad.
Sadly this has not happened,and descisions have been forced upon him.
A huge offer from SKY TV to comment on the Ashes series ,being at the forefront and needing prompt attention.
He's decided to accept and naturally needs to announce his retrement from International cricket,which he'll do tomorow with the support and thanks of The ECB at Edgbaston.They are his main employess.
Together with his stated desire not to stand in the way of emerging Yorkshire batting talent,a long -standing and recurring injury,together I'd guess,Yorkshire understandably not committing to offering him a contract for the future which would have needed to be in the region of Ł80.000 a year,and agrowingb dissalusionment withn four-day cricket,it's no surprise he has gone the way he has,and is likely to end his acssociationn with the county club as well.
Whether the DT leaked it or not is hardly relevant,it didn't take alot of working out,even to those not in the know.
I,ve no doubt Yorkshire will afford him the chance to play again before the season's out and give all an opportunity to thank him and show their appreciation.
Much that has been written is hypocritical,unneccessary and without basis in fact.
A great International batsman and captain has reached the end of his career,and seeks to leave in the most dignified fashion.
He should be allowed to do so,without the accompanying nonsense.
This message has been edited by Cleasby on Jun 29, 2009 2:03 PM This message has been edited by Cleasby on Jun 29, 2009 2:03 PM
Michael Vaughan said: "After a great deal of consideration, I've decided that now is the right time to retire from cricket. I've loved every moment of my time with Yorkshire. I've made some tremendous friends and also enjoyed some success, most notably the 2001 County Championship. Obviously, my England career meant I was away from the county for protracted periods but I hope I represented Yorkshire with pride around the world. I'd like to thank Yorkshire CCC members and supporters for their fantastic support down the years. I'm sorry I never got the opportunity to say a public goodbye, but I hope that will be later this summer. I wish everyone at the Club every success in the future."
Can I remind our Middelsex correspondant that although the ECB are paying Vaughan until today he was actually playing cricket for Yorkshire. So in effect Yorkshire are his employers (as is often the case with subcontractors). Whilst Virgil had to inform the ECB he should also let the people he's working for know what's going on. Even if this wasn't true most 'normal' people would also expect that Vaughan would tell Moxon/Mags that that he wont be playing as a matter of common curtousy .... from what Grayson has said Vaughan even told him beforehand.
Remember this isn't 'star' we've hired it ... but a cricketer who came through the Yorkshire ranks ... it was Yorkshire not England who developed Vaughan. Of course someone who doesn't care about Yorks would say that we get a large part of our income from the ECB ... but so do Notts who just 'buy in' players developed by other counties
Is anyone else struck by the irony of the fact that we're facing 40 yr old Caddick who hasn't retired while saying goodbye to 34 yr old Vaughan. My impression is that Boycott was just getting into his stride in his mid thirties - how many runs did he score after the age of 34?
The truth is that Michael never fully recovered from his injury.
Well,don't take it out on me that he's retireed.
The only one's with a problem seem the usual suspects on here.
He's done nothing wrong,announced his retirement from all cricket,and made that known to The ECB and Yorkshire today at the same time,in an official statement.
Neither have expressed any disappointment in how it was done and both have thanked him and praised him equally for his contribution to cricket,and the way he has alwauys conducted himself.
If Maan or anuone else with personal issues with me,thinks he'll not be in The SKY box next week,I msuggest they keep those thoughts to themselves,rather than making a fool of themselves on here.
Anyone with any grasp of the situation could have told you which way this was heading at the start of the season,and this outcome was inevitable,so let him go with the dignity he deserves and let's wish him well in the whatever he does,which will not be connected with Yorkshire CCC,at least in the foorseeable future.
"Vaughan will retire from all first-class cricket after Yorkshire turned down his request for a prolonged county farewell in one-day cricket this summer, fearing that it could become an unwelcome distraction. The decision caused an aggravated exchange in the Headingley car park between Vaughan and the Yorkshire chief executive, Stewart Regan, but around the county it will be generally greeted with approval."
OH come along Gilly.
Michael turned up to play having been selected,only for Regan to say he couldn't,no wonder he had a go at him.
It's jusr our esteemed C.E.O. getting it wrong once more.
Michael Vaughan's name and contribution to English Cricket will be remembered long after the flawed Regan becomes jut another footnote in Yorkshire's long-record of administrative disasters.
This message has been edited by Cleasby on Jun 30, 2009 5:11 PM
If anyone has any doubts about Michael's qualities, dig out your old Ashes DVD and have another look at his 166 at Old Trafford in 2005. Concentration, application and aesthetic style all in one...
No more need be said.
sadly the Vaughan on DVD you refer to Steve is a mere shadow of the Vaughan version in 2009 and MV himself has pretty much admitted as much.
You could also look back at videos of Bradman, Compton, Lara, Sobers, Boycott etc but not sure they are up to the same standard today as well.
I think its hard for some players to recover from bad injuries and also hard to get themselves up and be fully motivated again after achieving what must be the pinnacle of your career some time before your own sell by date. The motivation is not the same.
I don't think it was Stewart Regan who did not pick Vaughan on Sunday - it was a combination of him, Mags, Moxon and Vaughan himself. I am sure if Moxon or Mags wanted Vaughan to play then Regan would have gone along with it but I suspect his role is to manage the consequences of the decision once agreed by the others in view of the magnitude and clamouring for what is going on. This is why he will be involved so communication can be properly managed.
Sadly, Vaughan or the Telegraph leaking the news which was not to be officially announced til 2 days later makes Yorkshire look silly and is the one disappointing area. Why could Vaughan have not advised ECB and Yorkshire in advance of the Tuesday and ahead of or at the same time as the paper leaked the news?
Presume Telegraph wanted an exclusive and Sky wanted cameras there for the announcement so as Vaughan has money to make from both of these I think this showed his priorities and the club were right to not select him no matter how disappointing it must have been for the fans to not see him one last time.
It was a rather sad end to what was a decent career, but in the manner of his departure, Vaughan was the author of his own misfortune for the reasons cogently set out by dpressed and tripple centurion. Vaughan deserved better, given what he achieved. His achievements, though, need to be seen in perspective. If I had a choice of Vaughan, Illingworth or Close as England captain, I wouldn't even think about Vaughan. As for the Sky box, cleaby clearly regards Vaughan as untruthful, as Vaughan was explicit on the point, despite cleasby's claim that Vaughan had received an offer. Why would Vaughan lie? He wouldn't.
I'm sure Michael would be delighted to hear that you consider he had a "decent" career. I'm sure that as England's most successful captain, Ashes winner, and one-time best batsman in the World he'd be delighted that you consider he did okay.
Just reading Vaughans article written by himself in todays telegraph and he quotes
"something I'd like to make clear is that it was completely my decision not to play last Sunday in one last game for Yorkshire. I thought Yorkshire should move on with all their young players but Stewart Regan had told the BBC that I was going to make one last appearance."
So those of you slating Regan for stopping Vaughan from playing and those of you upset at being denied watching Vaughan for one last time may wish to go and find a new scapegoat as if Regan had his way then you may have seen a swansong from Vaughan.
But that's totally different from what Regan says .
He claims that Michael was pulled out by Yorkshire to avoid the surrounding speculation that may have distracted from ther team's performance.
And what was the row in the Car Park about?
Who are we to believe?
so we now have the ECB picking our team, the Chief Exec picking our team, Michael Vaughan picking our team... in fact anyone but Moxon and Mags who should be picking the team.
I suspect there was a limit to what Vaughan could say on Sunday as he had not formally announced his retirement - for it to be stated on Sunday that he had decided himself not to play but he had not retired may have looked odd and caused apoplexy amongst us fans.
By Regan/Mags/Moxon agreeing this with Vaughan it saved face
Stevec shouldn't let his prejudices run away with him. Vaughan was an average international batsman, who very briefly topped the international rankings, and was a better than average county bat, with an appealing style. He cannot compare with the very good or the great test players.
As a good test captain, who had great respect from his players, his stats showed he won more games than other captains, but England now play far more games than ever before, so its not a realistic comparison. He also took full advantage of the laws.
He's also extremely savvy with the media!
I think you'll find his winning ratio of Test matches was the highest of any Engalnd Captain so the volume of Test Matches played is irrelevant.
Exploiting the rules is one part of captaincy - I think you'll find they accused Sir Leonard of the same thing. Perhaps he was just an average County pro as well?
What you call being "media-savy" is actually intelligence and simple good manners. Both are sadly rare in the modern game.
I remember Michael playing cricket with the "Mynahs" as they were then, on a Sunday morning at Headingley when he was captain of England. He spent three hours playing with the kids and didn't leave until everyone had an autograph and he'd faced a ball from every bowler. He didn't need to do this, and he wasn't being "media savy".
He's just a decent man, who played some quite exquisite cricket shots and represented his County and his Country with dignity and enormous distinction. His career was sadly blighted and ultimately curtailed by injury.
I'm genuinely sorry you feel the need to be so dismissive and cynical.
I look forward to Steve's post retirement biography of Vaughan's career and then the Steve C book review of the said book.
I am closer to Steve's view than Maan's but Vaughan is more media savvy than Steve suggests as witnessed by his pre-arranged announced retirement at Edgbaston (why not Headingley on Sunday?).
However, his comments re Flintoff and the pedalo incident when he nearly undid himself with his version of what he said show he is less media savvy than maan thinks.
i don't think you can argue with his leadership qualities or record and he recognised strengths and weaknesses in individuals and tackled them on an individual basis. He was creative with his thinking and made sure that each player on the team took some personal ownership and responsibility which created a stronger team.
His batting at the top of his game was very pleasant on the eye but for those of us with shorter memories his last couple of years were mere cameos with that beautiful cover drive and the lazy pull through mid wicket to a ball that never seemed to be short of a length to me wonderful to watch but often followed up by an error too early in his innings.
I'm thinking of writing a book myself. "Vaughan - A Million Reasons Why"
You're completely right, he became a shadow of the player he was - don't think we'll ever know whether that was injury or he just lost that extra 10% that makes good players great. There are comparisons with Hutton - but he was able to adapt his natural game after injury to become a more prgmatic run gatherer instead of the pre-war batsman who could dominate attacks. Both remained superb captains.
I think the Edgbaston business reflects the complex nature of modern cricket and media PR - i feel the dread hand of the ECB in it all.
Agreed - I would hope he is not lost to the commentary box as he would make a great tactical coach in a few years time - you have to look at Giles, Jack Russell, Chris Adams, Paul Grayson etc of recent retired players now coaching to some degree or other and think that Vaughan would be better than all of them.
His commentary box presence may accelerate the removal of one of the more annoying current commentators (I do hope its Bob Willis) but I think Michael should be put on a central contract by the ECB once again with a view to developing his coaching career with some of the younger age groups run by the ECB and then gradually eased into the full set up alongside Flower pot so in a few years we have an Englishman coaching the national side once again. Perhaps its a similar situation to Stuart Pearce with the England football team but without the bulging eyeballs and raging anger...
Hopefully Sky will replace Nasser "Mr Plural" Hussain in the Sky commentary box by MV. I turn the sound off when he is on as his commentary grates and annoys me, with his constant Pontings. Warnes, Peitersons and Boparas, he can not speak more than one sentence without pluralising someone. Everyone is unique, there are not dozens of Pontings!!!
