Deontology asserts that morality is derived from fixed rules. When applied to cricket selection theory, it usually manifests itself as ideas that demand specific balances rain, hail or shine (for example "always pick your best six batsmen and your best four bowlers, even if it makes you less likely to achieve desirable outcomes"), or particular rules relating to when you can drop or select players. I reject this as I think selection for each game should be based on winning/drawing matches/series, and therefore many factors should be considered in a sort of cost/benefit analysis. For further reading, read my posts in the thread Monk created about Australia's allrounder.
