England Cricket / Frank Gregan / 27 June 2011 /

The ommission of Paul Collingwood from the T20 match on Saturday and the upcoming ODI Series was on somewhat vague grounds. He may not be in his prime but there should still be a place in the side for this reliable performer, says Frank Gregan.

It's only 13 months ago that England under the leadership of Paul Collingwood secured their first ever Cricket World Title when they defeated their old foe Australia in the Caribbean and lifted the T20 World Cup. After 35 years of trying, England had finally managed to win a limited overs title. What a difference 13 months make. From Barbados to Bristol, from Collingwood as skipper to surplus and for England from Champions to Chumps!

England under their new skipper (there's that many of them you might get confused, this one is Stuart Broad) were comprehensively battered by the Sri Lankans in the one and only Twenty20 of this tour on Saturday. It doesn't matter though, heck no, it's all about building for the future and making sure that England are spot on when next year's Twenty20 gets underway, ironically in Sri Lanka.

We've heard that before somewhere, every time England are on the end of a thrashing! "It's all about the future old chap". Nonsense, it's all about the here and now and there was no need to start making major changes to what was a first class unit. Everyone fully understands the 'rip it up and start again' concept when something has gone horribly wrong but when you've just been crowned World Champions? No need.

It's accepted that you've got to keep evolving in order to maintain success. Like a shark has to keep moving to survive, the team has to maintain momentum, cast aside the weak and replace them with the strong. In fairness to the selectors, they have tried to keep continuity, although four of the side that helped to win the World Cup (Collingwood, Tim Bresnan, Michael Yardy and Ryan Sidebottom) missed Saturday's game. For various reasons, out of that quartet only the former skipper was available for selection but his absence was a self-inflicted wound by the selectors.

Collingwood had retired from Test cricket earlier in the year in order to extend his one day career but the selectors have overlooked him for both the T20 and the 50-over series against the Sri Lankans. It seems a shabby way to treat someone who is not only the first captain to put any silverware in the cabinet, but is also England's all-time leading run scorer in the 50 over game.

He's also an inspirational fielder, capable of stealing a wicket and more than capable with the ball in hand. He's an all round good egg, not only on the pitch but off it, a very popular figure in the dressing room.

So why was he left out? According to national selector Geoff Miller "his omission is down to form over a period of time," a classic case of one rule for one and one for the rest because if form was the prerequisite for selection, Stuart Broad wouldn't have taken the field on Saturday. If form is the key ingredient, why on earth was Ian Bell left out of the team? Ah that one's easy to get - because he's Ian Bell - the selector's perennial whipping boy!

The five game 50 over series gets underway tomorrow and once again the Sri Lankans look to be overpriced at [2.3]. The tourists may have struggled with the English conditions over five days but in the shorter format they will fancy their chances against their hosts.

Paul Collingwood will not be playing but if common sense prevails, Ian Bell will be in the line up. In typical Collingwood fashion, he thumbed his nose at the selectors by scoring a century against Yorkshire last week. He is a class act and even if the consensus is that his time is up, the situation could have been handled more diplomatically.

The selectors appear to consider him yesterday's man or last year's vintage. The irony is that last year was the finest vintage that England has ever produced!

'.$sign_up['title'].'

'; } } ?>

:

:

:

?

: