Should the selectors have picked crocked players in the first place?

This debate is now closed.

Yorkshire all-rounder White is in Adelaide playing grade cricket, and will fly to Perth on Friday to join up with the England squad.

Vaughan underwent knee surgery at the end of the domestic season and is still to recover, while there are ongoing concerns over England's bowlers.

Gough is not expected to play for at least two more weeks, Jones is still struggling with a side strain while batsman Mark Butcher is suffering from a knee injury.

Were England right to gamble on the infirm?

They shouldn't have taken Key or Crawley. Key's weakness on the back foot will be exposed by the Aussie seamers and Crawley has already had two Ashes tours and proved himself to be inadequate.

If Vaughan or Trescothick aren't fit both of these second-rate players will be in the starting XI. Bell and Ramprakash should have gone - we've got three openers and didn't need another one in Key.

These injuries, along with Thorpe's withdrawal, have made England's top six look feeble. As for the bowlers, I don't think there's a Test-class seamer in England who isn't injured at least once a year.

At least in Jones we've got genuine pace and the two best bowlers (Caddick and Hoggard) haven't broken down yet. I expect more injuries in the seam bowling department but I hope the selectors are going to pull a fast one and play both spinners at some stage with Dawson playing a vital role.
Joe, Yorkshire

Clearly there aren't enough quality players in England. Why are England so prone to injuries over the last few seasons? Australia don't seem to have this problem, and they have quality players lining up who can't get in.

Unfortunately, the more cynical of us will start to believe that we have already started to get our excuses ready before the first ball is bowled in the series.

I hope we do well (it can only be good for the game) but some of the whining about pitches, sledging and injuries already coming out of the England camp sound a bit familiar.

Players who can't cope with the full rigour of the game at the top level both physically and mentally ought to come home now and give others a go.
Tim, UK

The dilemma we have is that the only way we can even begin to compete with Australia is to field our strongest side including Gough, Vaughan and Thorpe with everyone in good form.

Clearly this is not possible and I think the best thing we can do is stop whinging about the misfortune of injuries and get on with it. We'll almost certainly get hammered by the best side in the world, but it'll be nice to at least say we gave it a good shot.
Rob Page, UK

England is not the only team around the place that plays two-up with the fitness of players. Australia gambled on bringing Brett Lee back too early from corrective elbow surgery in the last Ashes series in England. It would appear that they have lost that gamble. Lee has not recaptured the fire, accuracy and pace he had pre-premature comback.

I guess they did that because they wanted the best available team on the paddock to take on the Poms. I think England has done the same thing, it's only natural when taking on the oldest of all rivals. One word of warning though, be careful you don't ruin anyone's career in the process.
Rob, Australia

I see cricketing nations like Australia, India and Sri Lanka play more cricket than England. How's it that the English players are more prone to injuries, when they play much less cricket?

England have to rethink about their policies and planning. At the moment they don't have many options as they don't have enough talent in the reserves. It's not just a worry for the Ashes series alone, as it could pose bigger problems during the World Cup.
Jae, UK

It's a joke that Duncan Fletcher says that England had to take their best players even if they were unfit, and asking the reporter whether he expected them to be left at home. Of course they should have been left at home.

I always thought that you take the best players who are ready to play, not be ornamental. However good a player is, if he is not fit to play he has no business being selected in any team, let alone a national team for touring to the toughest opponent country in the world.

No wonder the walloping has already started right from the lowest county sides, and it is not going to stop. England will be thrashed in every single game they play in Australia and will come back shattered.
Venkatesh R V, Hong Kong

Quite frankly, the selectors have got it wrong again! Surely someone must have realised that with so many of the squad injured there was a disaster just waiting to happen!

Losing matches to better teams is one thing but losing due to rotten planning is quite another. Isn't four years enough to pick an injury-free team?

Where is Ramps, White, and Tudor - at least they're fit. Now England are in the grip of a vicious circle. Poor planning leads to poor performance which leads to poor confidence. The Aussies won't have to play well to beat Nasser's troops...they can do that all by themselves!
Mic, UK

The extraordinary thing is the England selector's arbitrary attitude to injury. Craig White and Alex Tudor are left out because of injury but Jones and Harmsworth - two rookies with deplorable fitness records - are selected.

Plus, no all-rounder to cover Flintoff (until now). The reason we have hit big scores recently has been White batting down at number eight! Poor old Chris Silverwood - what has he done wrong?
Tim Mann, UK

Reasons for not selecting injured players: Lack of match preparation. Confusion in squad. Wrong message sent to Australian team. Remember, this is sport at the highest level and no passengers can be or should be carried.
Andy, Southampton

I think the selectors were barmy to pick all those crocks: medical advice may have led them to believe that they would recover by a certain time, but surely their experience with Gough and all the conflicting medical advice about his condition would have convinced them to take all such advice with a pinch of salt.

In the software business there is a word of warning: vapourware i.e. software that shouldn't be bought until it does REALLY exist. It seems to me that the England team as originally selected was the sporting equivalent of vapourware.
Nigel Barker, UK

Yet again another Ashes series begins with injury worries. Could these be physiological as well as physical? As for gambling on Darren Gough's fitness I find this quite incredible given the fact that he has hardly bowled this year. Would you get straight back into your club side after injury?

The injury saga has been pathetic and the buck stops with the selectors. One of the major weaknesses of the England cricket side is the chairman of selectors, who should have resigned years ago.
Mike, London

I can't understand why the selection of Vaughan, Flintoff, and Gough, etc, is such a hot topic. In the business world, you frequently plan making assumptions on the basis of the best information you have. If the information changes, you change the plan.

Fletcher and the selectors aren't fools, and it seems to me that what they did in selecting this squad was no different from that. So how can it suddenly become their fault if the players take longer to heal than the medical advisors thought? It's not as if there's no Plan B - there are a host of players already in Australia who can be called up, if required.

As usual, the debate is focussing on the short term, while the problem is far more deep seated than that. Read Mike Atherton's autobiography - when he was first picked for Test cricket, he'd never had a flipper bowled at him. He got one in a Test match and wondered what it was. Would players going into the Australian Test side be so ignorant?

You need to sort out your problems at grass roots. Coach the many kids who still want to play the game, get a high quality domestic structure in place and secure a volume of quality players.
Greg, Scotland

I'm lucky enough to be heading out to watch the Ashes soon. I think I might take my whites with me, the way things are going I could be in line for a game or two.

Personally I don't think that the selectors got it wrong. They selected the strongest squad (if fit) and then sent all the best of the rest to the Academy where they can be called on at short notice. Seems like pretty good thinking to me.
Ed Earl, Germany

England should have planned for this long ago. The Gough scenario where he came back from injury too early was badly handled, and if Vaughan needed an operation rather than play in the third Test against India he should have had it.

Over there they all are dying to put one over England, so you need your best players fit. The crucial question for Hussain and Fletcher is how to erase the mental scars, particularly among the older players, who have seen the Australians score at five an over and knock England over cheaply time and time again.
Andy, UK

The real issue is why are our leading cricketers injured so much. Compared to players of previous eras they play very little cricket, while the training methods and dietary advice is much more sophisticated.
Michael Barnes, England

There was no point picking Darren Gough in the first place. He hasn't played much for a year. A few warm up games which he will miss anyhow are not going to get him in shape for a Test against the best.
Michael, UK

England have picked injured players because of the lack of strength in depth - they do not have sufficient quality players to make up the numbers.

There are too many foreign players taking places in the UK county sides and the quality of county cricket is below par when compared to the Australian regional game.
Chris Nolan, UK

England could pick The Queen and David Beckham. It will still be 5-0 to Australia.
Duncan Fine, Australia

Flintoff should not have been selected in the first place.To take him injured shows how little the selectors know about the game. If you look at his averages, both batting and bowling, in Tests and even in county games, his record is abysmal.
Bernard Nightingale, Australia

It was always a gamble taking so many injured players. The batting will look very weak without Vaughan opening and Flintoff at seven.

We should call up Craig White and Ian Blackwell asap to provide some batting/all-rounder cover.
Whitsa, UK

Taking a bandaged team down under is ridiculous. Once the Aussies taste blood they are ruthless.

Also, what English cricket authorities need to ponder is the reason for so many injuries. I am told that India and Australia play much more international cricket than the Englishmen.
Gary, Dubai

I believe a slightly bigger squad should have been taken. Shall we say Ramps, White and another bowler? One good question is why we seem to have more injury problems than other nations?

Too much cricket? Quite possibly. It could also come down to the county scene and their health/fitness regimes and staff. Football in England had a revolution a few years ago when foreign coaches brought professional health and fitness regimes along.

County cricket is starting along these lines, but more is needed. It's ridiculous that cricketers' weight and fitness seem a matter of personal conscience.
Giles, Engerland

Interesting to see that since the advent of central contracts bowlers haven't been fit. With total control over the games that they are allowed to play, this means there is something wrong with their training or the way bowlers are being used in England games.
Neil, UK

England were correct in sending our best players, albeit with a number of injury concerns. Just look what happened to an under-strength Pakistan team in the recent 3-0 defeat to Australia.

I'm sure the experience will have knocked back a number of their young players for months, if not years
Ian Sherwin, UK

The pool of top English talent is so small that to leave behind Gough, Flintoff, Butcher and Vaughan when Thorpe has already been excluded would be to concede defeat before we even begin.

By and large, and unlike Australian cricketers, our players are not ready for Test cricket when they first get picked for England - they are picked on potential and have to learn on the job.

We simply have no-one to replace those who have been through that learning process.
Alex, UK

When will the England selectors ever learn? Winter in, winter out, we go away on tour with what seems like half the squad either injured or recovering from injury. We should have gone out there with a fully fit squad of players.

To already be talking about bringing in players from the Acadamey is ridiculous. All this does is create confusion with players coming and going on a dailly basis. What chance now for us to regain the Ashes - none!
Dave, England

I think everyone hoped that recoveries would not take as long but unfortunately they are. We should also not forget that the likes of Darren Gough and Andy Flintoff will not have played much cricket at all - even if fit by the first Test.

I think Craig White should join the squad as cover for Flintoff - he played well during the summer and in India and should have been there in the first place. Likewise, bring an old hand with the bat in for Vaughan... maybe even Ramps with his record against the Aussies.
Dave Massingham, England

I don't think England really had much of a choice. The only chance we have of making the series at least competitive is to field our best XI. That includes the likes of Vaughn, Butcher and Flintoff. With all these players in the team, as well as the talents of Jones and Harmison, we have the side to actually cause the Aussies some problems for the first time in years. We have to play them.
Joel Hockley, UK

England taking injured players on tour is a reflection of the lack of strength in depth in county cricket. If there had been alternatives, I am sure Fletcher and Hussain would have taken them. Let's face it, the Aussies could field two teams capable of beating a fully fit England!
James Thomson, England

It is inevitable with the intensity of the modern game that teams will rarely be able to field all their best players. England will have taken the best medical advice, and having spoken to the players will have decided the risks were worth taking.

One criticism is that England could and should have taken more players to Australia with all the uncertainties about players' fitness. England need to have strength in depth if they ever want to compete with Australia on level terms. With all the high-class Australians in English domestic cricket it is clear that Australia could almost produce two teams that could compete with England.
Paul W, England

I think they were absolutely right to gamble on the fitness of the likes of Gough, Flintoff and Vaughan. These guys, as well as the likes of Simon Jones, are top cricketers capable of competing and taking the game to the Aussies. Such talent is not in abundance in the county game at the moment, so there wasn't much of a choice anyway.
Nathan, Wales

I think the injured players should get more time to recover. As England are not going to win the Ashes anyway, this would have been a good opportunity to give younger players a chance to show their worth.
Willem Verhagen, Netherlands

The selectors understood that our only chance of victory in this Ashes series was to play our very best available side. It is a risky strategy, with players taking longer than anticipated to reach full fitness, but less risky than sending lesser players into the Ashes cauldron.
Joe Owen, England

The selectors and Hussain were desperate to compete, and obviously felt they could only do so at full strength. They have gambled on a couple of players and it looks like backfiring before the start.

They do have the Academy players to call on - don't forget Flintoff's impact last year in such a situation. They need to start well, and although it looks pretty bleak at present, things can change. I would say, though, that anybody who is not likely to be fit for the second Test onwards should be ditched now.
Stuart Wade, England

Obviously we need our best players available for the Ashes. If they can recover fully in time between now and the first test the risk is worth taking. What I am more concerned with is the number of casualties we have compared to other test playing nations. Are we doing something wrong?
Jason, UK

For players such as Vaughan, Flintoff and Gough there is nothing else the selectors could have done. Quite simply, there is no way England even have a chance of running the Aussies close unless they are there and on top form!

However, I find it pretty unbelievable, not to say unprofessional, not to have a back-up plan in place in case of delayed recoveries - especially for the warm-up games. Simon Jones should not have been bowling yesterday given that he's still recovering from injury - why isn't there a larger squad?
Dave, UK