Flintoff was 'drunk' at practice

Had to be cancelled because he was drunk!!!
FFS, why did they not strip him of the captaincy there and then?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/7065058.stm

I'm sure Ponting would be happy to pass on the title...

Spending the entire evening in the oppositions dressing room during the 2nd test is what p!ssed me off.

Brearley's oft repeated warning of oppositions encouraging bon homie in order to isolate one particular team member ( in this case the fcuking England captain) from the rest of his team, rang loud and clear. Seems Fred did this with bells on.

Irresponsible about sums up Flintoff's behaviour - and his stock will have sunk for sure.

The great Garry Sobers made test centuries whilst pissed. Give Fred a break. It's irresponsible of him, but I would have been driven to the bottle myself if I had to be Harmi's captain.

It should also be noted that Flintoff has constantly been reprimanded for being drunk at innapropriate times throughout his career. During the 2003 world cup, he was fined because he showed up to an official team function drunk. It's the selectors fault for making him captain despite knowing that this sort of thing was more than likely to happen.

It wouldn't be allowed in SA

So both Strauss and Flintoff were pissed for exactly opposite reasons then. I'm glad Flintoff ****** up royally, seeing as it was obvious to every sane Englishman that he wasn't captaincy material. Inspirational captains probably work in good teams. Average teams need something more imaginative.

But we shouldnt really be angry at Fred now. Those who follow English cricket closely know that Fred has been like this since he started at Lancs at a 17 year old. He gives 100% on the pitch, and thats all that matters. If England had won the Ashes, we'd all be saying what a 'working class hero' he is etc.

Joyzus, what's Feltch doing? Is he setting up some big book sales or something. What a p!ssweak thing to do to Fredalo.

skully wrote:Joyzus, what's Feltch doing? Is he setting up some big book sales or something.

Has to pay for that new w(h)ine cellar.

Aye Nath, he has that demeanor of being a humourless, whining tw@t.

Merlin wrote:Spending the entire evening in the oppositions dressing room during the 2nd test is what p!ssed me off.

Brearley's oft repeated warning of oppositions encouraging bon homie in order to isolate one particular team member ( in this case the fcuking England captain) from the rest of his team, rang loud and clear. Seems Fred did this with bells on.

Irresponsible about sums up Flintoff's behaviour - and his stock will have sunk for sure.

Pffft.. games over, have a drink with the oppo. Who cares?

Its not like he wasn't pally with them during the '05 ashes is it?!

As for Feltch, what an arse. So the bloke had a couple too many, doesn't mean he doesn't try his all. Maybe Ian 'i'm a complete sh1tehouse goody two shoes' bell should try it. He may actually not look like he's going to pooop himself.

Each to their own, Fred could probably play as well wasted as he could sober.

Henry wrote:The great Garry Sobers made test centuries whilst pissed. Give Fred a break. It's irresponsible of him, but I would have been driven to the bottle myself if I had to be Harmi's captain.

Trev, please tell me that you're not trying to suggest that Flintoff is in the same league as Sobers.

No, im just saying that some people can still play their best cricket after enjoying a few drinks the night before. It worked for Sobers, and it would appear that it has worked for Fred over the years.

Sure he over did it in Aus, but I dont remember him ever giving less than 110% on the field the whole tour.

holcs wrote:

Merlin wrote:Spending the entire evening in the oppositions dressing room during the 2nd test is what p!ssed me off.

Brearley's oft repeated warning of oppositions encouraging bon homie in order to isolate one particular team member ( in this case the fcuking England captain) from the rest of his team, rang loud and clear. Seems Fred did this with bells on.

Irresponsible about sums up Flintoff's behaviour - and his stock will have sunk for sure.

Pffft.. games over, have a drink with the oppo. Who cares?

Its not like he wasn't pally with them during the '05 ashes is it?!

As for Feltch, what an arse. So the bloke had a couple too many, doesn't mean he doesn't try his all. Maybe Ian 'i'm a complete sh1tehouse goody two shoes' bell should try it. He may actually not look like he's going to pooop himself.

Each to their own, Fred could probably play as well wasted as he could sober.

Totally agree Chas ... After the game - no worrries, get pissed, take the piss, hang out with, whatever ... NOT DURING, and certainly NOT alone.... take a few mates. Or had those mates of his started having second thoughts upo realizing that the coach was getting hacked off?

Wonder now, in hindsight, what would've happened had Vawn been in charge.



PS - Bell would need a teat on the end of his bottle of grog ...

Merlin wrote:

holcs wrote:

Merlin wrote:Spending the entire evening in the oppositions dressing room during the 2nd test is what p!ssed me off.

Brearley's oft repeated warning of oppositions encouraging bon homie in order to isolate one particular team member ( in this case the fcuking England captain) from the rest of his team, rang loud and clear. Seems Fred did this with bells on.

Irresponsible about sums up Flintoff's behaviour - and his stock will have sunk for sure.

Pffft.. games over, have a drink with the oppo. Who cares?

Its not like he wasn't pally with them during the '05 ashes is it?!

As for Feltch, what an arse. So the bloke had a couple too many, doesn't mean he doesn't try his all. Maybe Ian 'i'm a complete sh1tehouse goody two shoes' bell should try it. He may actually not look like he's going to pooop himself.

Each to their own, Fred could probably play as well wasted as he could sober.

Totally agree Chas ... After the game - no worrries, get pissed, take the piss, hang out with, whatever ... NOT DURING, and certainly NOT alone.... take a few mates. Or had those mates of his started having second thoughts upo realizing that the coach was getting hacked off?

Wonder now, in hindsight, what would've happened had Vawn been in charge.



PS - Bell would need a teat on the end of his bottle of grog ...

During, after, solitarily, with company.. no matter. On the pitch is what matters. No amount of beer, piss taking, banter, IMO would cause Flintoff to perform differently on the pitch!

Its an each to their own thing. And yeah maybe the Aussies thought they'd play a little game with him over it, but i'm not sure it would ever work with him.

It's always difficult to know where the truth starts and the spin stops.

But all that is said about FF's behaviour is entirely believable and the fecklessness of Davey Gravey re. communications about who would be captain and the general mess around it is all more than plausible.......sadly.

And yet Graveney has once again survived.

holcs wrote:

Its an each to their own thing. And yeah maybe the Aussies thought they'd play a little game with him over it, but i'm not sure it would ever work with him.

Err... possibly a 5 - 0 whitewash had something to do with their 'little game' ...

What if it had been, say, Hoggard or Bell or Strauss dunking long and hard with the Aussies rather than Flintoff ?
Would they be defended as stoutly as Flintoff is? I somehow very much doubt it.
Doesn't matter how hard Flintoff is seen to put it across on the field - fact is - he set a sh!t poor example ...

My point is - let's not make exceptions ... and let's face it, he was the bloody captain !
Otherwise why not let the whole team loose to get get rat-arsed with the opposition so it properly justified the 5-0 thrashing.

Agree with Merlo here - you can't for a minute think its ok for your captain to turn up pissed and have to cancel a training session?

As far as I'm concerned Fletcher/Graveney didn't do their job by relieving him of the captaincy there and then.

Funny that Graeme Swann was black-balled for seven years due to nothing more heinous than sloppy time-keeping.

I guess it was true that Fletcher had his favourites and everyone else was judged differently...

Aye, turning up completely trashed isn't necesarily the best example. We don't know whether Feltch exaggerated a little bit more than what was in fact the case. A little bit hanging is different to stark raving b0ll0xed IMO.

As for the drinking in the changing room. Each to their own. If Bell-hop or Strauss thought they could deal with it fine. And if it did distract them then they should get farked. All i'm saying is that:

1) I don't think that would affect his particular performance.
2) I'm not sure that a 5-0 whitwash can be attributed to just him? I mean weren't the other 10 players at home tucked up in bed when this happened? So its hardly a case that THAT worked either.

Each player to their own. If they think that it won't effect them, and it doesn't then fine by me irrespective of who they are..... In this case I don't think it did affect him, just think he was in p1ss poor form and a generally p1ss poor captain either way.

JKLever wrote:Agree with Merlo here - you can't for a minute think its ok for your captain to turn up pissed and have to cancel a training session?

As far as I'm concerned Fletcher/Graveney didn't do their job by relieving him of the captaincy there and then.

I hold Graveney fully responsible.
Of course not relieving Flintoff of the captaincy reflects a weak management, but I'm more inclined to believe that Feltch was most likely over-ruled by Graveney with regard to that decision.

It is well documented that Fletcher was a disciplinarian (and a Strauss admirer) - I think that if he felt as strongly as is suggested in his book about Flintoff's piss-ups, then I reckon Fred would have been removed as captain immediately.

It seems logical therefore to believe that the decision went to a higher level ... and Fred was reprieved.... only to go one further with the pedalo incident 2 months later in the Carribs.

holcs wrote: In this case I don't think it did affect him, just think he was in p1ss poor form and a generally p1ss poor captain either way.

Agree totally - the point is ... responsibility comes with the captaincy.
Flintoff clearly couldn't and cannot handle responsibility - I don't care how farking good the guy is (a la Botham 20 years ago) - if you can't hack it as captain, then stand up, cop the flack and resign (or expect to be sacked).

In hindsight (a great gift) - his sacking as captain after Adelaide with Strauss taking over might just have been the kick up the jacksy that both he and the team needed.

But we'll never know.... though we are still, nonetheless, left to choke on a 5 - 0 thrashing!

Merlin wrote:

holcs wrote: In this case I don't think it did affect him, just think he was in p1ss poor form and a generally p1ss poor captain either way.

Agree totally - the point is ... responsibility comes with the captaincy.
Flintoff clearly couldn't handle responsibility - I dn't care how farking good the guy is (a la Botham 20 years ago) - if you can't hack it as captain, then stand up and cop the flack.

In hindsight (a great gift) - his sacking as captain after Adelaide with Strauss taking over might just have been the kick up the jacksy that both he and the team needed.

But we'll never know.... though are still left to choke on a 5 - 0 thrashing!

Make him responsible and lose the player in many occasions. Let him do what he would do normally and at least you may still keep the player!!!

I think he did cop the flack in the Windies, don't think there is any doubt about that.

Not sure it would have made a difference. We were woefully outclassed, and had a bowling attack (Haggard apart) and a coach who either needed shooting or institutionalising!