Peter Moores was sacked as coach of the England team after the England and Wales Cricket Board gave former captain Andrew Strauss the new role of director of cricket.
The board said Strauss had been involved in the decision to fire Moores following “private conversations” with ECB chief executive Tom Harrison.
Moores has now lost the job of England coach on two occasions, having initially been fired from the post in 2009 after a bust-up with then captain Kevin Pietersen.
His second spell in charge, which came after he replaced Andy Flower following the team’s 5-0 Ashes thrashing in Australia in 2014, lasted just over a year.
It yielded just one series win, at home to India last year, and included England’s embarrassing exit from the World Cup, where they failed to beat a single Test side.
Afterwards came the recent 1-1 series draw in the Caribbean against a West Indies side labelled “mediocre” by incoming ECB chairman Colin Graves.
“At the moment it’s difficult to put into words how I feel except to say how disappointed I am in the way my term as England coach has ended,” said Moores in the same ECB statement that announced his exit.
Harrison, paying tribute to Moores, said: “Peter is a man of great integrity and has offered a huge amount to England cricket.
“This decision has been made as we focus on the future and our need to build the right approach and deliver success over the next five years within a new performance structure.”
Assistant coach Paul Farbrace will be in charge for the two-Test series with New Zealand starting at Lord’s on May 21.
Both Strauss’s appointment and Moores’s exit had been widely trailed in the British press and were announced in successive ECB statements on Saturday.
Moores, whose tenure concluded with Friday’s washed-out one-day international way to Ireland, lamented what he said was the ECB’s lack of patience.
“My record in developing players stands for itself and though we have had some frustrations along the way I am confident that this team will go on and bring the success the supporters desperately want to see,” said the 52-year-old former Sussex and Lancashire coach.
“I knew when I took on the role that this was going to be a tough period for English cricket and I would need time and support to get new players through.
“My frustration is not being given that time.”
Farbrace — best known as coach of the Sri Lanka side that won last year’s World Twenty20 — may be the man in possession, his ‘caretaker’ status means the speculation linking Jason Gillespie to the England coaching position is set to continue.
Now the coach of English county champions Yorkshire, having been brought on board at Headingley four years ago by Graves, the ECB’s statements on Saturday left open the possibility of the former Test fast bowler coaching against his native Australia in the Ashes series in England starting in July.
Meanwhile the ECB said Strauss’s new role would have responsibility for the England team’s long-term strategy, as well as its coaching and management structures.
Strauss, twice an Ashes-winning captain, was the overwhelming favourite to land the post of England director of cricket, a job created by the ECB last month following Paul Downton’s sacking as managing director.
golden
Guest
From a 19th century guide to conversation: Avoid pedantry; it is a mark, not of intelligence, but stupidity. I mean, you did ask to fix the headline twice.
CW
Guest
You Tom from Perth have forgotten another Tom from Perth. Tom Moody. Reckon he will also put his hat in the ring for the Aussie coaching job. There is talk he also has his name down to coach England. What is the world coming to. Will the Poms countenance an Aussie coach? Not on your nellie. Far too superior. 'What a colonial coaching our cricket side. This will never do old chap." Rod Marsh has a lot of explaining to do.
Atawhai Drive
Roar Guru
Fix the headline, guys. Please.
josh
Roar Rookie
Doesn't matter England have stamped his card, Never Again. Their loss I think.
Camo McD
Roar Guru
Yeah the administration at the ECB is worse than the on field team. It's a good role potentially but Gillespie might be wary. Pressure immediately on Strauss now after KP smashed 326* today.
Homer Gain
Guest
Vas, my take on Vaughan is that he is a classic tabloid provocateur. His written and spoken commentary is glib and frequently contradictory. It has not even dawned on him that a stopped clock is right twice a day. Even were he to be occasionally right, it is easy to make bold calls from the safety of the press box when you have never had the responsibility of doing it from the coaches seat. If he had ever done as the likes of Lehman, Langer and Gillespie have done, put his coaching abilities where his mouth is I might have more respect for him, but I doubt it would end well. He was a fine batsmen but his reputation as a "leader of men" is based exclusively on that 2005 Ashes. If anyone can point to what he did in that series - as opposed to simply being at the head of a fortunate constellation ranging from Flintoff's god-like performance to McGrath's freak injury to an incorrect call by Billy Bowden - I'd be glad to hear it. But even if he were a font of leadership brilliance in that single series it would be scant evidence on which to anoint him the new messiah. I say all this as a Yorkshireman and an admirer of Vaughan as a batsman incidentally. I don't claim that Andrew Strauss will transform England's fortunes (I express my doubts about the fundamental shortcomings of the England team above), but given a choice between who I think could lead a thoughtful, objective analysis of England's predicament and the presentation of solutions I would take Strauss over Vaughan any day of the week. Incidentally, I don't agree that Strauss will keep Cook in the job. What is keeping him there is the complete absence of alternatives. Me, I'd pick Andrew Gale. But as I say I'm a Yorkshireman.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
It's not a war boys. It's far more serious than that. I get what you mean but if it means a more competive series then I'm all for it.
SP
Guest
Gillespie would me mad to take on the English job.
Another Pom in Oz
Guest
It's not about being a mercenary, it's about being a professional. What about Rod Marsh, Troy Cooley and David Saker? All Aussies who have served England as paid professional advisors...
Vas Venkatramani
Guest
Hi Homer, what is your objection to Vaughan being chosen? I'm interested, as I feel it was little surprise England's best period came under Vaughan's helm, where enigmas like Flintoff and Pietersen were backed to play their way, and attacking cricket was not criticised for its risk, but more recognised for its reward. Under Strauss, all it does is entrenches the internal support for Cook, who has zero tactical awareness for the job of captain. As for Gillespie, he is now a professional coach, no longer a cricketer. I don't think there'll be any qualms from himself about coaching against Australia, and if they chose him, he'd do a good job. Again though, is his approach for aggressive tactics something that will be backed by Strauss and the ECB? If not, then Gillespie is better off sticking to Yorkshire and waiting for the likes of NZ, RSA, India or Australia to come calling.
Atawhai Drive
Roar Guru
Fix the headline, people.
Sideline Comm.
Guest
I'd be surprised if Langer did either honestly. He was famous for sleeping with his Baggy Green he loved it so much.
Tom from Perth
Guest
Nice word loquacious, and pretty apt. But at least Vaughan would have brought change.
Tom from Perth
Guest
Absolutely. Don't think Darren Lehmann would even entertain the idea.
Marco
Guest
Correct. Is jason going to stand there cheering england with every victory and so help me god if they win the ashes will Jason be standing on the balcony cheering celebrating a victory over his own country? I think this would be a step back even further for English Cricket
Hunter
Guest
I just can't understand how any Australian would want England to win the Ashes *by coaching them) and vice versa. Sam Robson opening for the Poms was bad enough but the day an Australian coaches an England team in the Ashes is the day cricket becomes a sport for mercenaries
Homer Gain
Guest
Correct about Cook the opener v Cook the Captain. Strauss is the right choice compared to that loquacious clown Vaughan. But appointing Strauss does not miraculously conjure a frontline spinner, a third (and fourth and possibly even second) seamer, or an effective team captain.
Alex L
Roar Rookie
Cook as an opener isn't a problem, but his captaincy is regressive to put it charitably.
Tom from Perth
Guest
Thing is, if he waits for 5 years it's only him against Langer for the Australian coaching job. Does he want to go for the big prize, or settle for the easy option? Also, who would want to work under Andrew Strauss? Basically entrenches Cook as captain/opener. Strauss is simply too close to this team to objectively direct cricket. In 10 years? Maybe. Right now? It's entrenching the current system which Strauss was recently a part of, and that system has been shown not to work. They need change from the top down.
Alex L
Roar Rookie
I think he'd be very gutsy to take that job with the schedule England have coming up relative to the position of their squad. They have to blood a new opener, fix their bowling, and get the captaincy into the hands of someone who makes decent decisions -- all with a media and public expecting results immediately against two superior sides.