Mark Ramprakash is feeling slighted. Michael Vaughan is feeling his patriotism diluted. But why Trott? and pray, why before a series against South Africa?
Vaughan’s allegations against Jonathan Trott have been touched upon. But adding to that voice, Ramprakash is perhaps taking out his disappointment of not being picked for the final Test against Australia at the Oval while Trott sealed it with a century to win the Ashes.
The Strictly Come Dancing star has also penned a book called “Strictly Me” in which he feels he was not given a word of encouragement and that his career was allowed to dwindle from the public eye while he has been scoring profusely for Surrey over the past five years. At forty, he is still expecting an England call up and believe that the selectors have done England crowds a great disservice by not picking an “English” cricketer for England.
Lest we forget where Mark Ramprakash’s roots really lay, he was quick to add that either the English cricketer should have either been born in England or educated in England institutions.
Why the issue is becoming so prominent is because England are unable to digest the banter that England is winning because of the presence of South Africans in the team and the corollary allegation that English cricket is not on par otherwise.
But these issues have been raised when Nasser Hussain was the England captain and when Monty Panesar became the first Sikh cricketer to turn up in England colours.
But what is inconceivable is that why when the opposing teams, especially Australia, have used the South African connection of England captain, Andrew Strauss, England wicket keeper, Matt Prior, Trott and Kevin Pietersen, to make them the butt of jokes, why England is raising the hulaa baloo when they should be standing behind the selection ahead of a tough tour such as England’s tour to South Africa.
Is this a pre emptive technique to silence the crowds?