Cricket Australia should approach Ric Charlesworth and appoint him as coach of the Test team as soon as possible. Support him, give him the resources he requires, and implement everything that he recommends.
The outcome will be another golden era for Australian cricket, lasting 10-15 years. Why?
Charlesworth, like McQueen, Bertrand or Bennett, gets the best out of his people. He commands respect and calls it as he sees it.
He is armed with both a high intellect, an ability to reinvent, and a work ethic that implements his plans.
Would Charlesworth have carried Clarke, North, and Ponting into the most important tournament in four years? No.
Would he allow players below Test level to under-perform (Jaques, Marsh, Ferguson etc) and hence not apply pressure to the Test team? No. Perform or perish.
You are representing your country. Surely that is enough motivation.
The case for Charlesworth is not a new one. I am merely adding my support to the public voice for his appointment. Peter Robuck wrote an excellent article on this topic in in The Sydney Morning Herald.
He has done it all in his sporting, professional, political and coaching lives. But his country needs him now.
And while cricket is probably his second love, in sporting terms, I am sure that he would love and enjoy the challenge.
Bring it on!
LeftArmSpinner
Roar Guru
MM hard is good, but smart and hard is better.................. that is Dr charlesworth
LeftArmSpinner
Roar Guru
of course he wont leave pre olympics but nor will cricket turn itself around anytime soon!!!!
LeftArmSpinner
Roar Guru
yep, Brett, it is not saviour that is the word. The word is shake up!!! they have the resources. gumption??? not sure. Actually, I am sure and the answer is a big no!!!!!! denial is a wonderful thing. why isnt dan Christian in the ODI team????? the other bloke, cant remember his name is the wrong bloke!!!!!! and Clarke, despite the batting lesson from the 17 year old, still hasnt got it. He stands in the middle watching Watson and Haddin bat. just what is he thinking as he watches them bat.
MM Fike
Guest
I believe he is better for hockey. There are some good hard men involved in the game of cricket in Australia. For some reason they are not in the right places to have any influence. A way has to be found to use their skills and knowledge.
Lolly
Guest
Yes, he really would want to control selections. He's has made some really gutsy selections with the Kookas, leaving big name players out of certain tournaments to bring youngsters on. And there is no reason in the world why he would leave the Men's hockey team till after the Olympics.
Jason Cave
Guest
And the problem would be is if Ric Charlesworth was appointed as the new coach, he would insist on having the final say on who should play for Australia-not the chairman of selectors or the captain. CA could forsee impending clashes of difference between Charlesworth and the chairman of selectors (likely to be Greg Chappell) over team selection. It would be much better if Charlesworth was the Chairman of an independent review panel into all aspects of Australian cricket.
Sylvester
Guest
He didn't achieve much when he worked for NZ Cricket, but I guess sow's ear and all that...
lopati
Guest
If CA want to keep their selectors relevant (as mentioned mideval mindset, or in other words jobs for the boys), but at the same time employ a coach has some control why not have the coach quietly lead the talent scouting. The coach picks 30 - 50 "contenders" and takes them under wing for squad training - rotating them back to sheild games (minimum 50% commitment to their sheild teams matches) to both gain experience and avoid getting too familiar with a [from the same squad] limited opposition. The "selectors" pick their squad of 15 from the coaches group, so in that way the coach influences but doesn't ultimately control the selections. (Within the coaches group, prior to tour selections the coach can send weaker players for intensive remedial coaching or simply declare them not 100% ready and thus ruling them out of contention - although a cap, say 8 players of 50, 7 of 45, ... is imposed on those coach rule-outs. And yes the coach can use rule-outs as a way to discipline his squad - "improper attitude" or "stuck up players demanding/expecting automatic inclusion" is also considered a fair reason for remedial coaching, albeit from a shrink.) Coaches contracts are for 5 years with renew clauses, performance targets, predefined performance bonuses, but also a an early termination clause if performance falls below a predefined level. Like any sporting organisation these days, politics does play a [way too] large role, nothing we can do about it.
Darwin Stubbie
Guest
This suggestion has Clive Woodward written all over it
Brett McKay
Guest
Leftie, the article that started to convince me appeared in the Sun-Herald just gone: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/why-rics-the-man-to-coach-cricketers-20110122-1a0iv.html I'm not sure if 'saviour' is the word (it tends to get thrown up like 'legend' nowadays), but it would certainly be interesting to see how the Australian cricket team structure changed under Charlesworth. You mention selections, and I'd imgain that would be one are where he would want strong input at the least, and maybe even the casting vote. The Centre of Excellence and the state set-ups would also be in for a shake-up, and much of it is long over due. It's certainly a mouth-watering prospect, but whether CA would have the gumption (and resources) to make it happen remains to be seen...
LeftArmSpinner
Roar Guru
JiMMM, selections are a problem. Sure. but those selected dont display the killer nor are they sufficiently prepared for the job at hand. Of course, the more you shout leave him alone, the more we cricketers want him!!!!!!
LeftArmSpinner
Roar Guru
vinay, I realise this. I also realise that he is unlikely to abandon the mens hockey ship mid ocean. But, Cricket needs to think best in class and then work towards this. 2 years is not far away, in the scheme of things and the incumbent has just been re contracted.
JiMMM
Guest
While I agree with everything that you have said, Cricket Australia can sod off leave Ric in Hockey, at least until after the 2012 olympics. The problem in cricket has to do with the selections, more so than the coaching, which the coach doesn't have a final say on (unlike in hockey where Ric picks the squad, and matchday team). Something I noticed yesterday when the hockeyroo's (Australian Women's team) squad was announced, was some of the public comments asked for Adam Commens (the new coach) to be appointed coach of the cricket team because he dropped some of the established stars (Kate Hollywood is the most prominent) and brought in 7 new faces (3 of which were from my club). This really shows that there are some major structural problems surrounding the Australian Cricket team that when we have a great team can't be seen, but when we are mediocre seem bigger than the tasman sea.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Lefty,The time has passed. Charlesworth severed his ties with Indian Hockey about two years ago and that was the time to approach him. He was without any commitments then. Now he is committed upto the London Olympics and will not be relinquishing his charges. Cricket's loss is hockey's gain. In the absence of Charlesworth I believe Steve Rixon is a good alternative. Somehow,I feel,his involvement with the now defunct ICL,is being held against him. Just like with Jason Gillespie,who had to go to Zimbabwe to get a coaching gig. CA's thinking is caught in a medieval time-warp.