sussexpob wrote:Its always been an argument I am less than sympathetic to when someone says "but what are the alternatives". In short, the alternatives might represent a risk, but when a team is performing badly its a risk you need to take. You either accept the obvious limitations of a system and understand you build towards a forever broken future, or you make a change and hope you find a system that has a better capacity to grow. Sticking with what you have is not a cause of action you take simply because you accept its difficult to find something better. You have to at least strive to be better.... I accept other people have a different ethos, it comes down to what type of person you are, so arguing on here about it is not going to change peoples opinion. From a personal level Id rather fail miserably striving to make a difference.
Id like to see the purge of all the deadwood in the management. Like Bayliss have a year where he isnt having Flower breathing on his neck, where he gets to pick his own leader for the team, and where the so far worthless appointment of Andrew Strauss is reversed.
Making_Splinters wrote:I don't think anyone is saying there aren't alternatives, well the plural might be slightly wrong, or that Cook is a particularly great captain. The point I'm trying to make is, that Cook is not the reason England have been having issues. Switching him with anyone else is a case of deck chairs on the Titanic.
Captains don't win matches, batsmen, fielders and bowlers do that.
Return to Cricket Opinion Polls
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests