Selectors: Which of the following is a worse case scenario for England:

1. Flintoff is made captain, captaincy takes its toll in Australia and his bowling AND batting go awry...
2. Strauss is made camptain, captaincy takes its toll in Australia and his batting goes awry...

I would suggest that the first is a worse case scenario and therefore, it has to be Strauss. Flintoff must be prepared to concentrate 100% on his bowling and his batting, without the added pressure of captaining the England side

Should England appoint Strauss as captain, I am sure that almost all of Australia will welcome it as a defensive move.
The debate on whether all-rounders make good captains has been going on in England for decades now, and really, it all seems a bit patronizing to me to suggest that an all-rounder would have too much on his plate in handling all the different aspects of the game. Richie Benaud and Imran Khan, at leasted to my limited knowledge are considered as two of the better captains.
Now Flintoff might lead England to the Ashes or he might not, but the fundamental thought here is, that in order to win in Australia England will need some extraordinary inspiration, and that inspiration is more likely to come from Freddie Flintoff than it is from Andrew Strauss.

Very valid points, but will Flintoff not be more destructive if allowed to focus on his batting and bowling (and slip fielding) without having to worry about captaining?

Also: what seemed to work last time against the Aussies was a thoughtful (batting) captain who had the tactical nous to use his attacking options both with bat and ball when needed (KP, Flintoff et al). If the balance of the side is to be kept as intact as possible, Strauss is a better option as a like for like replacement of Vaughan.

The Aussies are no doubt searchiing for ways to stifle Flintoff. Does he need to be a 'triple target'?

And as for Strauss' inexperience as a tourist in Australia, it seemed that one of the strengths of the England side last summer was that they had no 'baggage'. Strauss would approach the task without painful memories...

Yours,

Daniel, Copenhagen

I think Strauss should be the captain simply as I think he has the calm influence over the team that Vaughan had when England were successful in the last series and even though Flintoff is the better player, his questionable fitness on return from injury means that there is enough doubt to make Strauss the better choice.

Interesting that of the 10 certainties mentioned, 5 were anything but that at the start of the summer : Cook, Collingwood, Bell, Read and Panesar. Just goes to show how quickly things can change in cricket.

On the captaincy question I would tend to continue with Strauss who has done a good job and who's form with the bat has certainly not suffered. Let Freddie stick to being the best all-rounder in the world without adding to his burden!

i think flintoff should be the captian...remember the way he got the boys up to fight the last test in india series

As an Aussie any advice I give is perhaps going to be regarded with a raised eye brow.

But my view is "we" want the best England can offer and that would have been Vaughan wo any doubt.

However it is a sign of Englands improvement in these past few years that they have two equally viable options in Strauss and Flintoff.
Each carries a special risk for England. England need both to do well individually just as Australia really needs Ponting at his best.

Indeed the individual success of these players may well decide the fate of the series.

Certainly had Ponting managed to maintain his incredible batting record of the past three years in 2005 (averaging over 70 with numerous 1st innings centuries) then Australia would now SURELY be defending the Ashes, not aiming to retrieve them.

So which of the two players ( Flintoff or Strauss) is the more likely to sustain form and rise to greater heights perhaps? The answer in my view has to be Strauss.

It would suprprise me greatly if England's "Fred" could come close to repeating his wonderful 2005 efforts, on Australian wickets and with the likely rebound of Aussie batting ( Ponting will be "extra motivated", but greats such as Hayden,Gilchrist and Martyn have something to prove-all failed in 2005 and then there is Hussey)

No I am afraid Fred is in for a struggle this time round and he doesn't need captaincy chores to weigh him down.

Strauss on the other hand "has the goods"-he rises to the occasion. Evidence his 2 great Ashes centuries when Warnie was baiting him, evidence his taking charge this season and winning the confidence of his team against Pakistan in both test and one day games.

I think it is in fact a "no brainer" - Strauss to captain England to give the series its best chance of being close!

Unlike Flintoff, Strauss has 'bunny' potential. If Sri Lanka can pick Strauss' seam, just imagine what Australia can do? It has to be Flintoff!

I think you could go with either chap. They're equally competent and able.

My only query would be on whether Flintoff would bowl himself appropriately. It's difficult for bowlers to be totally objective about that question.

As such I would slightly tip the scales to Strauss.

Strauss, definitely. No way Flintoff should have to worry about anything other than tearing in and bowling fast when he is not smacking it around with his newfound maturity as a batsman. If England pick Flintoff to be Ashes captain, it will be the mistake that will cost them the Ashes. No point worrying about what might happen to Strauss; it makes much more sense to worry about what might happen to Flintoff.

I think Flintoff will be better able to batter and bully us if someone else (Strauss) is in control of said battering ram; intimidation will be an important part of Flintoffs job. Also I suspect that Strauss will be better able than Flintoff to continue the tactical dominance which Michael Vaughan so wonderfully started in 2005, a significant part of which is due to his closer alignment with Fletcher. Flintoff can also be more than sufficiently inspirational and encouraging with his deeds with bat and ball, not to mention his mere presence.

I hope the poms come over here firing on all cylinders and really have a good crack at us at home, the first day and first Test will be critical for them.

What a pity it'll all be happening in little more than 6 weeks...

I think Strauss would be a better option at this stage. Freddie isn't even fit yet. Might be a bit hard for him to come back from injury, bat at six, bowler 20 overs per innings, occassionally open the bowling and still captain the side. Flintoff is better as part of a leadership group. Someone who can provide brilliant, inspirational spells of batting and bowling. Better that he has someone making the decisions for him, holding him back so he can unleash his brilliance.

Also, not many bowling captains in the last 20 years. Pretty unfashionable these days.

I go with Daniel on this issue. Flintoff proved himself a charismatic leader in India - and it even improved his game somewhat. However, his actual tactics were nothing to write home about. He showed no ability to improvize or adapt on the fly. To paraphrase an old saying - Flintoff's method of winning is to bash things down and if that doesn't work - get the bigger hammer. I doubt such tactics are enough against a hungry Aussie squad on home turf.
Straus is the only alternative - he's a thinking cricketer and that is about the only edge England will have against Ricky Ponting. Flintoff should be senior bowler and should focus on that aspect of the poms game. Even then I think Australia will win - but at least give the poms every chance to fight it out.

Batting, Bowling, Tactics or whatever..
All i know is the leader of a team leading them onto the playing field must command respect and a certain aura around Him would make it much better.

Hands down, Flintoff is better in all these respects.. All i know is the only team that challenged the Aussies in their own backyard were the indians 2 years back under the mercurial Sourav Ganguly.
A man all australian players acknowledged was intimidating and he fired his team up courtesy his own attitude.
Strauss is a good vice captain but aint going to succeed in Australia as a captain he's too soft for a place where they like to play it hard.

Please dont make the mistake of ignoring Flintoff's charisma factor...and make this ashes a no contest...that would be a crime !!

Strauss is a better captain with a series victory under his belt, and it can probably be provided statistically, that he is the only England captain in the last 10 years, that has not had a batting slump instantly when given the captaincy
(It’s happening to Michael Vaughan in home test series against South Africa after he scores 140 against them.

Strauss gives you what you need in a leader, he also gave the other players confidence when giving them a role e.g. with the ball, panesar and sajid in test format and jon lewis in the ODI's are examples.

When Flintoff is captain his form suffers. Evidence of this are, his bowling average is higher than he batting average during this period, something that hadn’t be applicable to him for a long time. His bowling speed and rhythm also suffer. For him to perform as he did in the 2005 ashes, its best to unburden him, because at the end of that tour he will be physically and mentally, exhausted and you don’t want such an asset to suffer for burnout.

As a South Arfican I await the ashes with interest.I only wish that our players will show the same passion for the game that both England and Aussie have.
For me the question of the captaincy of England has only one logical conclusion,that being the appointment of Freddie Flintoff as captain.Although he may not have tactical ability of Strauss his ability to motivate his team mates is what counts.Tactical ability can be taught but presence and leadership can only come naturally.

Good to see serious posters from fans.

I certainly agree with 'HS Lallie' post (Lallie you seem to forgot Kapil Dev, who won the World Cup too). If England appoint Strauss as captain, then they will be little defensive on the tactics. I don’t see Fredy any inferior to Straus, winning a test and drawing a series in India was not an easy job (ask AUS for) and Fredy did it commandingly. I don’t think Fredy had any better team than what Straus hag got for PAK series (Strauss is fortunate that, all the younger players are in form, otherwise he would sucked the grand mammas legs). If couple of players fad off form during ashes mid-season then a good leader is needed who exposed to tough situations. I think Fredy will do a better job in these circumstances, as he can inspire both bowlers and batters with his unlimited knowledge.
Moreover Strauss was not a first choice and was filling gap for injured Fredy. The negative side of Strauss is, if you see couple of test matches against Srilanka, he dropped many key catches, and I suspect his dedication & team spirit and he is sort of selfish character.

AUS are also notorious, and the first thing they do is play and dissolve the strong mindset of the captain (ask Nassir Hussain on this) and they verbally attack the key players even prior to start of the series. The ashes series is not just cricket series, it is as pride moment the team who wins it. So it is not a time to debate on captaincy; rather a quiet decision would be suggestible to keep the players egos under the carpet and be together in a key series.