England may have wrapped up the Ashes series 3-0 with a game to play, but that hasn't stopped the sniping at the way England went about victory.
Iconic Australia leg-spinner Shane Warne has been scathing about the captaincy of England's Alastair Cook.
In his Daily Telegraph column, he suggested that Cook is negative and that England won the fourth Test at Durham and series in spite of Cook's leadership, rather than because of it.
[David] Saker and [Andy] Flower knew England were losing the Test largely because of the captain's approach but the tea interval came at the right time for England.
He had a deep point, would move slips out as soon as there was a good shot through the covers and the bowlers were bowling too short and not full and at the stumps.
When such a natural reader of the game as Warne criticises the decisions a captain makes, his reasoning deserves consideration.
And he's right inasmuch as Cook has routinely been a defensive captain. He often sets fields deep even when his side has the momentum, he removes fielders from catching positions earlier than some of his rivals do in similar situations, and it often feels like games can drift for spells under his watch—the failure to end the 10th-wicket partnerships in this series being a prime example.
But the evidence that Cook is a bad captain simply doesn't stack up—and here's the proof.