Well there was certainly a furore about Paul Collingwood's decision not to recall Grant Elliot following the controversial run out incident in the ODI yesterday.  But was it really that bad a call? 

Cast you minds back to the World twenty20 last year.  Was Kevin Pietersen not run out in far more controversial circumstances?  Shaun Pollock deliberately runs across KP's path, knocks him over whilst he is in the air but over the crease, and because he is playing for England we are all to accept it!  The collision between Elliot and Sidebottom was undoubtedly accidental and Collingwood is crucified for refusing to recall the Black Cats star in a very tense game.  Where was the same criticism of Graham Smith last year?  Ok the South Africans hate KP, but the fact that he plays for England came about due to "the quota system" which is just another form of racism but because it is against whites no one is allowed to say that.

What would Steve Waugh have done if this situation had occurred with an Australian side under his command?  "It's part of the game, deal with it" I bet would have been his response.  As long as English sport worries about "doing the right thing" rather than winning we will continue to be the nearly men in all sports not just cricket.  Look at the most successful sides in cricket - the Aussies, South Africa and India take no prisoners, winning matters.  The sooner we follow this attitude as well the better chance we have of becoming winners again.

On a separate note I am glad that Collingwood has been banned for the slow over rates deployed by England in the last two ODI's.  What with the boom that is twenty20 and the apparent threat this poses to the 50 over game the last thing cricket needs is slower games to bore the audience.  However, would this ban have been as harsh, or imposed at all, had the aforementioned incident not occurred?