In every other professional sport, the Head Coach of the national team takes responsibility for his or her team’s performance – both on and off the field. So why do we persist in holding one of the Australian cricket players responsible?
It’s not a complex question, because the answer is simply – habit.
The Board is still thinking inside the square of old traditions, which die hard. It protects the selectors and the coach from media scrutiny; and will continue to try and get away with it for as long as it can.
In this modern era of mass media, it is a tremendous strain on a player to have to captain a side, play well, participate in TV commercials, conduct a private life, and be the media spokesperson for the sport.
It is in the public interest for the coach to become the spokesperson for every sport. Or in his or her absence, the manager should assume that mantle of media responsibility.
Alexander
Guest
The thrust of Adrian's comment, as I read it, is to retain the present stutus quo insofar as the structure is concerened. What he is advocating is to maintain the Selectors panel - of which both the Coach and the Captain are members. The change he is advocating, and I agree, is to increase the work load/responsibility of the Coach and lessen the media work load and off field responsibilties of the captain. On field captaincy remains the same - in any sport, but critical in cricket
dasilva
Roar Guru
I think the only problem i can think of about not having selectors and giving that job to coach is that selectors can theoretically watch all the domestic matches and know more about new talents or who is in form and who's not then a coach who's have a lot of responsibility with internal tactics and coaching of the side.
Jennie
Guest
Why is the Coach not responsible Mick? I can identify with your feelings re amateur v's professional. Good point. Isn't that what Kerry Packer proved? Can you please tell me what IPL is. (sorry!)
Mick of Newie
Guest
Wouldn't it be interesting if cricket teams appointed a coach who was all responsible like the football codes. It is clearly archaic that a group of 4 amateurs are the selectors, the coach is fulltime but not really accountable because he doesn't pick the team. The captain appears to exert significant influence whixh is fine provided he is not the problem. I wonder if the IPL will be the catalyst for this sort of change. Amateur cricket associations aren't going to drive this form of reform but privately owned franchises will seek out the most effective structure.
William
Guest
Spot on. And it's not just because we have been losing. Other sides are improving. We export Coaches. Their charges improve. Those Coaches front up to the media - and we expect them to do it. Robbie Deans is an example in Rugby. It is an extremely cruel ask, to insist upon a Captain to front a sport. This is most painful when he is asked to appear on National TV in connection with one of his team member's conduct off the field of play. Its time to move forward gentleman.