The end is nigh for Freddie

So it turns out that Andrew Flintoff probably won’t recover from surgery in time for the ICC World Twenty20, with England’s opening match just 19 days away.

This frankly does not come as a great surprise, as the ECB always seem to under-estimate these things.  Freddie has been rushed back from injury too quickly in the past.  They also assume that he can come straight into the side and hit top form, despite the fact that he rarely gets match practice outside of international cricket.

The selectors need to be prepared for the fact that Flintoff’s days as an international cricketer are numbered.  Excluding the abandoned test in Antigua, he has been fit for a mere 7 tests out of 28 since the last Ashes series in Australia.  That’s just a quarter of all tests in which he could have played – on that ratio, he will break down sometime during the 2nd Ashes test this summer and miss the rest of the series.

Whilst we could never question his commitment of level of intensity, his performances since 2005 have been moderate, with no century and no five-wicket haul in that time.  England as a team tend to obtain better results without Flintoff.  In tests in which he has played since the 2005 Ashes (21), only 3 have been won and 13 lost.

This is bad enough, but if we also cannot rely on Freddie to be fit on a regular basis, it makes it doubly difficult for the team to plan around him.  Currently his place is assured as long as he is fit, but if this is on a more occasional basis, it becomes doubly difficult for Andy Flower, Andrew Strauss and the selectors to plan ahead with any certainty.

What about the players who are called upon to replace him?  Currently they know that, unless their performances are consistently top-drawer, they will make way as and when he is available.  Yet to other established players who have broken into the team since the last Ashes (Ryan Sidebottom, Ravi Bopara, Matt Prior, Stuart Broad, Graeme Swann) he is a virtual stranger within the dressing room.  This is bound to have a negative effect on morale.  The same goes for the other pace bowlers – when Flintoff is in the side, he is expected to be the talisman leading the attack.  When he is not fit, the dynamic within the team has to change yet again.

When Flintoff was at his best, his place as an allrounder effectively meant that England had twelve players, in that he could contribute substantially with both bat and ball on a regular basis.  However, we have not seen the best of him in four years, and currently when he is in the side, the balance is upset.

Ever since Ray Illingworth plucked Craig White out of county cricket, we have been obsessed with fielding five front line bowlers.  It is not always the best policy.  Of the top teams in test cricket currently, only South Africa can effectively do so, with Jacques Kallis.  Australia, India and Sri Lanka all field just four front-line bowlers.  Indeed, in recent tests, Australia have used Andrew McDonald, considered more as a batting all-rounder, as a 4th bowler with essentially just three main bowlers.

The litmus test for selecting an allrounder should be this: can that player justify his selection in the team based on his strongest discipline only?  If he cannot, he should not be selected.  Ian Botham, Richard Hadlee, Kapil Dev, Imran Khan, Wasim Akram.  All of these players could have been selected for their bowling alone.  They all had the ability to run through the opposition batting on a regular basis.

Flintoff does not.  He bowls very well, can be hostile and has great passion, but he is not a great wicket taker.  So why do we still expect him to be?  Purely based on statistics, Freddie is overrated.  Tony Greig is not particularly revered as a great allrounder, yet his test figures compare favourably with those of Flintoff.

In theory, a world class allrounder is great.  In practise it is extremely rare.  This will be anathema to many English fans, but the time has come to move forward without Flintoff in test cricket, even in the Ashes this summer.