Vaughan - England lack mental toughness

[pies4ever]

Vaughan hits out at lack of 'mental toughness' in domestic game
Wisden CricInfo Staff - August 25, 2003

Michael Vaughan has slammed England's domestic structure for consistently failing to produce players "mentally tough enough" for international cricket. Speaking at the press conference following England's 191-run defeat by South Africa at Headingley, Vaughan explained that he thought the national side's failings were partly down to the way the first-class game is run.

"I think over the last few years a lot of England teams have been very similar," he said. "When you get on top of an opposition in Test cricket, especially against a good side like South Africa, you have to make those situations count - we didn't do that here and we haven't done it in the past very well.

"Maybe it's mental and maybe it's to do with attitudes and the way we're brought up in our game, but it's happened a hell of a lot in the past. This isn't the first time it's happened and it's really something we're going to have to look at. The English game is progressing nicely but I think we have to start looking deeper than that now.

"Situations have arisen in games before and we haven't quite been ruthless enough to take that opportunity and maybe that stems from the amount of cricket we've been playing," Vaughan continued. "Players just play and are we enthusiastic for the whole summer in the game, I'm not too sure we are. I think we have to be honest enough now. We're not really producing the amount of players who are mentally tough enough for Test match cricket.

"I'm not the guy to change things, but this should be looked at. If you arrive at a Test match you should be mentally tough enough. You pick young guys and they have to learn and a great way to do that is out in the middle, but you need guys who turn up mentally tough with a great attitude and I'm not too sure our system is allowing that at the minute.

"It comes from within, but if you get a guy young enough you can install that in them. If you look back throughout the years, English players have had that laid-back type of attitude where we play so much county cricket that it can get boring.

"Practice is a massive part of our game and we don't get a great deal of time to practice, especially county players, they're just on a treadmill. They play, they never get chance to get in the nets and work on their skills and work on the mental side so if you're struggling you basically work it out in the middle. You don't have the opportunity to go and work for hours and days with the coach and try and sort it

[STOKA35]

Michael if you lived in australia we have been saying this for years.
I think it is time for england to drop guys like stewart, butcher and build a team around yourself flintoff, trescothick harmison. from what i can see playing in england looks like social cricket as it doesnt get too hot and if you are a bowler you dont have to be quick as there is plenty of cloud cover or you might struck a wetty to seam it around, or as a batsman you strike a flat pitch the bowling is'nt quick enough to get you out.Come to australia guys like kirtly bicknell would be cannon fodder

[Donny]

Vaughan under the cosh
The Paper Round by Freddie Auld - August 26, 2003

Needlessly coming off for bad light, their failure to finish off South Africa when they were down, their woeful bowling and careless batting … the list of England's disasters in the Headingley Test goes on and on. But the one man who has been on the wrong end of today's press is Michael Vaughan, whose honeymoon - if he ever had one - is now well and truly over.

If Vaughan is starting to wonder why he took the job, then so apparently are some of the national newspapers. Christopher Martin-Jenkins, in The Times, said "Michael Vaughan is, as yet, a naive captain. After the match he was drawn into repeating the tired clichés about the excess of county cricket, its lack of competitiveness and, the latest addition to the lexicon of excuses, the 'fear factor'. CMJ admitted that the excuses may be true, but said, "there has been a sight too much philosophising by England's captains and coaches in recent seasons."

Angus Fraser agrees in The Independent. "It has not taken long, three Test matches to be precise, for Michael Vaughan to follow in the footsteps of his predecessors and blame the shortcomings of his England side on the domestic game". Fraser admits county cricket is far from perfect, but says it can't be blamed for inconsistent batting and bowling, and that the England team should not ridicule it so openly: "Absolutely nothing is gained from sitting on your backside for a week and playing on a Playstation."

So Vaughan needs to philosophise less, and according to most, needs to be more ruthless – like his opposite number, Graeme Smith. Pat Gibson of The Times was one of many who threw doubts on Vaughan's relaxed style of leadership: "It is about time that someone spelt out the way of the world to England's cricketers in the same way that Graeme Smith spells it out to his South Africa players, but it is not going to be Michael Vaughan."

James Lawton in The Independent was more succinct on Vaughan's shortcomings. He said "England at Headingley were a leaderless rabble of quite shaming proportion," and that Vaughan "looked a broken man". He added: "[Ray] Illingworth's point that Vaughan might not have the force of personality to pull off such a huge challenge was perhaps, on reflection, not the aside of an irredeemable curmudgeon but a genuine insight of someone who indeed knew what he was talking about."

But Vaughan didn't take all the flak. Mike Selvey in The Guardian had a word or two for Vaughan's out-of-touch opening partner, Marcus Trescothick. "The time may be approaching … when the selectors have to decide quite how sacrosanct is the opening partnership." Selvey insisted that the way Trescothick has repeatedly been caught in the slips "smacks of ill discipline rather than a technical shortcoming". And Selvey doesn't stop there. He goes on to argue that Trescothick's recent poor run demonstrates he is not out of nick but that he has been worked out, with "bowlers understanding that he appears to lack patience or judgment outside off stump," and that "he gets bored". Trescothick, who has copped most of the blame for England's bad-light walkoff, certainly won't have been bored by the papers over the last couple of days.

The Sun and The Mirror, as you'd expect, didn't waste their words. "You're a load of softies," ran the Sun's headline, while Mike Walters of the Mirror grumbled, "a fitting finale to a witless defeat which was enough to make you scream."

Meanwhile Cape Argus, a South African newspaper, as well as pointing out England's obvious mistakes, identified the return of Jacques Kallis as a major factor in South Africa's win. "Nobody has ever doubted Kallis's ability as batsman and fielder, but he has not bowled the way he did in this match since the 2001 series against the West Indies."

So what now for Vaughan and England? Well, it's not going to be easy, according to Mike Selvey in The Guardian: "Vaughan, who looked increasingly lost as the match wore on, will have his work cut out if the damage inflicted by a side that was almost in the morgue on the first day is not to prove irreparable." Who'd be an England captain?

[Donny]

Vaughan slammed by county chairman
Wisden Cricinfo staff - August 27, 2003

Michael Vaughan's comments in the aftermath of the Headingley defeat, that the county system was largely to blame for the national side's weaknesses, have been criticised by John Elliott, the chairman of Worcestershire.

Vaughan said that the county system did not make players tough enough, but Elliott scoffed at the claim, maintaining that it was the players themselves who were to blame. "I think he is totally out of order," Elliott fumed. "What does it say for the English county cricket clubs who are striving to improve the game and the standard of cricket in England? England should look internally. He has basically called the players a load of wimps who are not good enough to play Test cricket.

"We have done everything for them," Elliott continued. "We have given them central contracts, brought in two divisions in the County Championship and National League, made one-day cricket 45 overs etc. They have got all the help in the world with physios, psycho-analysts, dieticians and managers. They've got everything and they still can't get out there and play the game. I think they should look internally rather than complain about English county cricket."

And Elliott was unimpressed with the decision to allow several of the players to miss the next round of domestic matches. "I am in favour of central contracts but I think the system should be fine-tuned. Many a time a player is better off playing cricket than just idling around."

[Donny]

Wisden Cricket Monthly
He must win their respect
Angus Fraser - August 27, 2003

The last thing Vaughan should attempt to do, following Nasser Hussain's rash resignation, is emulate him. A new captain cannot be seen to live off the achievements of his predecessor, no matter how successful he had been. He must be his own man and the manner in which he carries out the job has to sit comfortably on his shoulders. A dressing room is too emotional a place for the most influential member of the side to hide behind a facade. It is only a matter of time before an incident finds him out and he loses respect.

Vaughan's ability with the bat gives him an advantage over Hussain but that alone is not enough to win his players over. It is how he interacts with them that will decide how successful he is. Respect is the first and most important thing a new skipper has to win. There are many ways of gaining it.

Hussain's came from his total commitment to the job and his astute, if not altogether popular, tactics. With his fiery nature nobody wanted to cross him but he never criticised his players in public. Hussain knew which players needed a shoulder to cry on and who needed a kick up the backside. The players knew where they stood and what the game plan was. But Vaughan's approach will be totally different. Chiding players at every imperfection can work at times but it can also wear thin enough to be counter-productive.

I can relate to the position Vaughan finds himself in. Before I took over the captaincy at Middlesex in 2001 the club had had two rather intense captains – Justin Langer and Mark Ramprakash – whose style was not too dissimilar to Hussain's. Sitting in the wings I could see the younger players going into their shells. They were afraid to express themselves because of the looks they would get if they got it wrong.

Like Vaughan I wanted to see my players go out and enjoy themselves. I felt they would improve as cricketers if they played the game the way they wanted to. Such a set-up will not become a free-for-all as long as the work ethic and aggressive nature of the team remain strong.

Vaughan is no soft touch, however. To have achieved what he has in the last 14 months he must be a fierce competitor. If confirmation is required, ask Glenn McGrath. Vaughan did not take a backward step to the mouthy Australian fast bowler during the Ashes.

The hardest part is making decisions that will directly affect the careers of team-mates. There is no pleasant way of telling someone he has been dropped but, as long as you are consistent and honest, there should not be a problem. Attempting to appease a disappointed player is a nightmare. Being called unpleasant names is something you have to expect.

Emotion is no bad thing. You want to see players angry at being left out but to reduce the ways a disgruntled player can attack you it is necessary to be whiter than white. A captain soon realises that it is not just the media or ex-loved ones who look to expose any faults he has or mistakes he has made.

The captain who appears to get the balance right is New Zealand's Stephen Fleming. Although I played with rather than under him I know he is a man who commands respect because of the quiet, professional and controlled manner in which he conducts himself. Fleming takes the job as seriously and works as hard as any captain but he is able to put what he does in perspective. In his year at Middlesex he seldom raised his voice. He did not have to because, when he spoke, everybody listened.