England right to rest Andrew Strauss for the tour of Bangladesh

The England selectors have taken the controversial decision to leave captain Andrew Strauss at home for the upcoming tour of Bangladesh.

Strauss' vice captain Alastair Cook will lead the side for three one-day internationals and two Tests against the Tigers in February and March.

In the Weekly Debate, Graeme Mair defends the decision, while former England captain Bob Willis argues Strauss should be going to Bangladesh.

You can send in your own views by using the feedback form at the bottom of the page.

Correct to rest Strauss
Resting Andrew Strauss for the tour of Bangladesh makes perfect sense - both for the present and future success of the England team.

Strauss has been on the international treadmill virtually non-stop from the moment he succeeded Kevin Pietersen as skipper and, during the recent drawn series in South Africa, the strain was starting to show.

His batting form, excellent through most of the year, tailed off alarmingly and on his return home from South Africa he admitted to being "pretty jaded".

In that context it makes no sense to push him on through a trip to Bangladesh when the priority must be to keep him fresh for bigger challenges ahead - in particular the Ashes defence in Australia next winter.

England not sending their regular captain will be interpreted by some as lacking respect.

More disrespectful, perhaps, is that Bangladesh are allowed to retain their Test status despite having made little discernable progress since their elevation to the five-day format in 2000.

The Tigers have compiled a miserable record, winning just three of their 61 Tests - one against Zimbabwe and two against a woefully under-strength West Indies, whose best players were all on strike at the time.

Strauss' absence also gives an opportunity for the selectors to find out about Cook's credentials as the long-term successor, as well as providing an opening for another batsman, probably Hampshire's Michael Carberry, to gain international experience.

Those who run English cricket are often criticised for their lack of foresight, the post-Ashes decline from 2005 and calamitous relationship with Allen Stanford being two recent examples, but resting Strauss needs to be applauded.

While in the short-term he will miss a total of five matches against the weakest team on the international circuit, the opportunity to refresh mind and body is likely to allow him to extend his career. By not to sending him to Bangladesh, Strauss should actually end up playing more international cricket in the long-term.

Opening batsmen who average in the mid-40s across a long Test career are rare, particularly in England where the new ball often moves around lavishly.

Those who baulk at the idea of a highly-paid sportsman requiring rest because they do not enjoy the same luxury in their own job need to understand that most workers are easily replaceable with someone of similar skill but Strauss - in the short-term at least - is not.

Australia have granted Ricky Ponting occasional rests during his captaincy reign to good effect, most notably for a one-day series in New Zealand prior to their victory at the 2007 World Cup. Ponting's absences have barely attracted any comment, so why the fuss over Strauss?

Source:skysports.com/