Michael Vaughan lashes out at Jonathan Trott

Former England skipper Michael Vaughan isn’t amused about the things which former England batsman Jonathan Trott has written about him in his new autobiography titled ‘Unguarded’.

Vaughan has lashed out his former teammate claiming ‘an attack on my honesty.’

In his column on The Telegraph, Vaughan wrote, “We were allowed to believe he was struggling with a serious mental health issue … but he was struggling for cricketing reasons and not mental, and there is a massive difference”.

Trott was also asked about these questions from television personality Piers Morgan, but the England batsman questioned the former skipper’s impartiality.

Trott wrote, “If I was out of the way – and Vaughan’s scorn for my condition made it quite clear that he thought I should be banished forever – might there be more room in the side for the likes of Joe Root, Jonny Bairstow … Scott Borthwick and Ben Stokes? Only Michael Vaughan can tell you for sure whether he was influenced by that relationship.”

He further mentioned, “But it shocked me that the BBC and the Telegraph continued to use him as an analyst despite the possibility of the perception of a conflict of interest.

Surely there should have been a disclaimer at the end of every article he wrote or every show on which he appeared letting the public know the context of his views? Anyway, at the time, it felt as if Vaughan was trying to crush me when I was down.”

Vaughan took to his Twitter account and his legal team had been involved in the excerpt The Times had published. Vaughan said, “It is wholly wrong and entirely false to suggest that any comments I have made concerning professional cricketers are anything other than my genuinely held, honest opinions.

Criticism of my opinions, my actions and even personal criticisms are all fair game, but I will not accept any attack on my honesty or my integrity. Nor will I accept accusations that I set out to positively damage the career of any professional. My solicitors have today written to the Times concerning the inaccuracy of the article.”