Not Vaughan’ted?

After a small matter of six months, Michael Vaughan has mustered the courage to speak up about the establishment – he says he was shut out by the old England regime during the last Ashes.

He is an interesting man, is Michael Vaughan. “I'm an Ashes-winning captain with a huge amount of knowledge on a lot of things and I wasn't used at all,” he said. I could almost see him turn red with embarrassment . Such modesty, Michael. Especially after having won the Ashes so many times, your hands must be aching holding that urn for so long. And why was it that when Australia lost to Vaughan’s team (he’d prefer that usage, I reckon), a Steve Waugh or a Mark Taylor never made such statements? There was no old regime versus new regime then, I suppose. Or they hadn't won the Ashes often enough?

So is this Vaughan’s way of ensuring a smooth comeback to the side when (perhaps the word should be “if”) he recovers from his injuries? (I suppose I’ll be accused of initiating conspiracy theories for raising this question.)

I don’t remember England having any stipulations about players speaking to the media, so why is it that Vaughan chose to wait for so long to make these deeply insightful confessions? Well, I shouldn’t quibble about that – most revelations seem to come with more of an eye on the future than the past – sample the comments on Greg Chappell of late. I wonder what’s in store for Tom Moody after he moves on from Sri Lanka. And we are waiting for that eulogy on John Buchanan, aren’t we? Warnie, is your pen poised?