In the Observer, Mike Brearley is of the opinion that Michael Vaughan's increasing restlessness, his becoming the Tinkerman, may also have been expressive of the insecurity and distress that led him to resign.
The BBC web commentator recently came up with a nickname for Michael Vaughan: Tinkerman. In last week's Observer Sport, Vic Marks noted that 'Vaughan must have made a record number of field changes - I made it 253 yesterday.' This says a lot about Vaughan (and something about Vic's capacity to keep counting). What had happened to make Vaughan tinker so frequently with the field? Was it a good thing? Had an inventive and exploratory trait become a compulsion to change for change's sake? Did Vaughan feel, desperately, that he had to do something all the time? And what did such tinkering do for the bowlers?
Stephen Brenkley, in the Independent on Sunday questions whether Vaughan will make it back into the team as a batsman.
When Michael Vaughan resigned in a veil of tears a week ago, he expressed his earnest desire to regain his England place as a batsman. All the right things were said in the immediate aftermath, but a week is a long time in cricket. Almost by accident, or at least by the magisterial use of Graeme Smith's bat, England's selectors have been given some wriggle room. There is no pressure on them to recall Vaughan. Indeed, quite the reverse: there is suddenly pressure on them to do some proper selecting.
In the Sunday Telegraph, Steve James says that critical eyes turned upon Peter Moores last week.
Two England captains, Michael Vaughan and Paul Collingwood, resigned. And their successor, Kevin Pietersen, had initial misgivings about taking over. All three had difficulties in their relationships with the coach. Only a lengthy meeting with Moores allayed Pietersen's worries.
RSS Feed
