England make Gough wait for Test recall

It was confirmed yesterday that Darren Gough will not be playing Test cricket for England here in New Zealand next month. Considering the confusing messages emanating from various representatives of the England and Wales Cricket Board, this should possibly be taken as a kind of once, but not for all, substantiation.

Gough was not picked for the Tests in New Zealand because he was unavailable for those in India late last year. His galvanising burst of four wickets in 11 balls on Wednesday persuaded some observers that he should now be picked, although the squad was announced weeks ago. However, if Gough really fancies playing the three Tests and the selectors are prepared to make an embarrassing climbdown which would be a huge blow to their integrity, both parties should immediately think not of this winter but next.

The Yorkshireman should be spending all the time he can in his Buckinghamshire pile being molly-coddled. The punishing schedule faced in 2002-03 by Gough and his colleagues, which surely threatens to undermine World Cup prospects which were already slender, was brought firmly into perspective by Tim Lamb, the ECB's chief executive.

The itinerary was always due to be crammed with cricket from October to March, taking in the ICC Knock-out, the Ashes, the Australian one-day triangular series and the World Cup. England's preparations, already beset by the anticipation that the team may not be good enough in time, are further hindered by the arrangements in Australia.

Part of the Test series will be followed by part of the one-day series before the Tests are finished, and then the last matches in the one-day competition are staged. It means that World Cup squad will be forced to adopt a piecemeal approach during the final build-up to the most important of all limited-overs competitions, one in which England have played abjectly twice in succession.

For the first time Lamb has admitted that the itinerary is unsatisfactory, but commercial considerations, otherwise known as the dash for cash, won the day. "As administrators we have to look at things from a multi-dimensional viewpoint and, given the unique structure of next winter, they said the commercial downside of not having the Sydney and Melbourne Test matches back to back over Christmas and New Year would have been extremely detrimental to their business.

"I'm convinced we'll be able to make the best of it for the World Cup. The management team is very good and I'm convinced we'll be able to make the best of it for the World Cup. Originally, it was very unfair on England. We managed to reduce the arduousness of it."

Lamb, who may have had no options, was convincing nobody. The truth is that England have probably been terminally hampered. They are less experienced than almost any other team and any reduction in focus will be telling.

Given the shenanigans, Gough is best out of it for this winter. Nasser Hussain, the England captain, and Fletcher, the coach, said that he would indeed be. However, the chairman of selectors, David Graveney, was not conclusive in the matter until yesterday, and Lord MacLaurin, the ECB chairman, was quite effusive about the idea of picking Gough during a radio interview. It is no direct business of his lordship who plays for England.

But then he has been busy on another front. He has apparently written to Hussain congratulating him on the the award of the OBE. He also says in the note that he would like a word with Hussain soon about rumours that he is to give up the captaincy after the World Cup. His Lordship may well like Hussain to stay on, but it really is not up to him.

While Lamb has been in New Zealand on International Cricket Council business, he also seized the opportunity to speak to that body's chief executive, Malcolm Speed, about the Sunil Gavaskar affair. Gavaskar is chairman of the ICC Cricket Committee (Playing) who, in his other role as media pundit, rubbished England as boring whingers in a newspaper column. England duly and rightly reacted.

"I think it's unfortunate that somebody who is in a neutral position as chairman of a committee should seek to make disparaging comments," Lamb said. "So far as I'm concerned it's not an excuse that he's an honorary non-executive officer. There is a dilemma here. I've spoken to Malcolm and I expect him to deal with it. I think people can combine roles and Sunny is doing a good job as chairman, but he has to be more measured in what he says about a particular team." As measured as those who draw up itineraries.