‘He’s too close to the team.’ ‘How can he make decisions about blokes who he’s played with?’ ‘Isn’t it merely jobs for the boys?’ ‘The team are struggling and need someone from outside’. So they said about Darren Lehmann in summer 2013.
‘He’s too close to the team.’ ‘How can he make decisions about blokes who he’s played with?’ ‘Isn’t it merely jobs for the boys?’ ‘The team are struggling and need someone from outside’. So they’re saying about Andrew Strauss in summer 2015.
Spot any difference?
In truth there are deviations but broadly speaking the two appointments were one and the same. An international team seemingly in a bit of a mess and in need of some stability and corrective guidance.
Yes, Lehmann and Strauss have slightly contrasting job titles on their contracts but thematically the paths were, and are, similar.
It all comes down to outside perception. Lehmann the link with a successful past, a no-nonsense character who understood Australian cricket and would get under-performing players back on the straight and narrow with an old-school approach.
Strauss the link with a successful past, but privately-educated, a symbol of all that is wrong with the English administration, a man who won’t be able to make the tough calls and will just allow a rotten system to continue.
Both populist opinion and while an argument could be made for both, neither are necessarily correct.
Lehmann was a bit of a punt, he had no coaching experience at the very top level and he wasn’t long out of the game.
Strauss is a bit of a punt, he has no administrative experience and he isn’t long out of the game.
Both were a potential step in the wrong direction, but hindsight now shows Lehmann’s ascension to be something of a masterstroke and to judge Strauss after next to no time in the role is a touch hasty.
As with Lehmann, Strauss has inherited – not created, that is an important factor – a listing vessel, albeit an administrative rather than playing one, but stating that he’s not up to it after a few admittedly calamitous days is premature.
One of the ironies of Strauss’ appointment is the questioning of his balls for the job with no evidence in support. In effect, to say he’s a company man and nothing more is to question his integrity with, you guessed it, no evidence.
The sacking of Peter Moores was needlessly shabby and the line drawn under Kevin Pietersen’s England career the latest development in an increasingly tiresome soap opera, but both were decisions that needed to be made.
You can’t, on one hand, ask for decisiveness and then criticise when that is forthcoming. If Strauss is to learn anything from his initial exchanges it is the need for an effective PR department (no laughing at the back).
Lehmann, courtesy of the 2013 Ashes series, was able to assess what he had, decide in which direction they needed to go, and the results followed.
That is the position England now find themselves in. For all the negativity that is floating about, the Test team, unlike their one-day counterparts, aren’t in a desperate state.
Doom and gloom, especially after such a dismal World Cup, was inevitable once the West Indies weren’t seen off, yet that came down to an hour of witless batting and not an utter breakdown in performance. Such are the margins.
As was pointed out by many a couple of years ago, Australia paid for a couple of poor passages of play in England and once some perspective was applied it was clearly not all a mess.
Strauss is nobody’s fool and it would be wise to recognise what he achieved with a team that came under his control in the midst of chaos created by a batsman (no prizes) deciding that a change in coach (the same) needed to be handed his unemployment papers.
Given some time and a sort-of blank canvas on which to work, Strauss may well be the man English cricket needed, just as Lehmann has proved with the Australians.
But with all that’s gone on, I hope he’s come armed with a thick skin.
JohnB
Guest
Given the Daily Mash had an article on it yesterday http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/sport/sport-headlines/england-cricket-team-decides-against-picking-only-one-who-can-hit-the-ball-2015051398253 and given all of the English on-line papers have had regular pieces on Pietersen since he was told he wouldn't be picked again in 2014, and a flood of articles on the topic lately, I'm not quite totally sure all of England has moved on from Pietersen being in their team. Quite sure that the England and Wales Cricket Board and some/many in the current England team would have liked to have moved on.
Quitwhinging
Guest
It may be cricket but was still his job. Couldn't he pursue an unfair dismissal lawsuit? Since the only reason he seemed to be sacked is because the captain was told some home truths and became insecure and a nobody with a less than stellar playing career didn't like him? Also the slander thrown towards him could also count in his favour. I kind of hope he does just to see the reaction of the ECB.
SP
Guest
I'd be pissed if i was an English supporter. He's far and away their best player. Pietersen might be a lot of things but he didn't abandon his team mates halfway through a tour like Trott and Swann did. Along with Carberry, Pietersen was the only English player to show guts on their last tour. Yet they hurried Trott back into the team and no doubt if Swann wasn't so desperate to protect his average average, they'd ship him back in too. It seems ok to abandon your team mates in tough times if you're an English player. Having to share a dressing room with Prior, Swann, Broad and Anderson would do anyones head in. Weren't these the knobs that Strauss condoned (on his watch) having a fake Pietersen twitter account?
Tom from Perth
Guest
Yeah but he's one of the boys!
Tom from Perth
Guest
Hear hear. Imagine if they made Vaughan director of cricket, Dizzy coach, and KP captain! Bloody hell they might start playing good aggressive cricket!
Tom from Perth
Guest
Me too.
Zim Zam
Roar Rookie
I have to admit, when I read that KP had made 300 just as the ECB were trying to shut everyone up about him for good, that made me laugh. Poor England, nothing's going right for them at the moment. It shouldn't make me happy, but it does.
nick
Guest
Lehmann did have coaching experience at a high level. Coached in the IPL with success. Coached the Queensland team with success. Main thing is he has he respect and confidence of the players.
Jameswm
Guest
Thank you Strauss for making our job of retaining the Ashes that much easier. Only in England. You pick a guy who clearly has an agenda with a current player. Smart.
Rich_UK
Guest
Anyway, its spicing things up nicely in time for The Ashes :) I forsee Jimmy causing chaos on an overcast Day 1 and Warner ending up in jail before the 2nd test
golden
Guest
true, and Symonds left in a bit of a dark turn... neither resulted in much good thereafter
Spooky
Guest
I think Straus would know KP as good as anyone. And probably accounts for his 1st job as boss telling KP his services are not required. I do think there has been some mixed messages to KP over the last 6months which is poor management. Lastly I think there is some serious over estimate of where the Aussie team is at the moment, I'm not convinced they can get play the swinging balls and have seen Anderson swinging like never before lately.
Johnno
Guest
Michael Clarke did the dirty on Simon Katich, and punted him
golden
Guest
Strauss is a terrible appointment and I can't see England doing well under his tenure. He presided over a successful team but he was no Ilingworth and he was no Vaughan as a captain either. His captaincy was efficient but inflexible and short of innovation. The team he had prospered on the back of work from Hussain, Vaughan and a good english system that was put in place around 2000 - central contracts, loyalty to players and talent identification. But the system in place now is clearly not working. It is too conservative - although the appointment of separate coaches for ODIs and tests will help - I think England needed to change things up even more. They need a shift towards the aggression and innovation of India, Australia, New Zealand. If New Zealand can put the cattle on the park, England can too, but presently they are not picking them. It feels like the old boys club with Strauss's appointment (and I have nothing against his public school background) and a bit of a PR stunt to bring him in - dual Ashes winner, took the team to No. 1 - get someone popular in English cricket in, rebuild the ECB brand. But by offering up KP an ODI coaching role - well the PR stunt is already a shambles. If he secures Gillespie, he'll have earned his salt for a while but above all he needs to get the right players on the park and Strauss is too close to the ECB and the players for that. There was an opportunity there to bring in someone who might have said "no" occasionally. Absolutely dreadful decision - harks back to Gooch punting Gower because he didn't fit in. Bring on the 90s mach 2.
Chancho
Roar Rookie
I made that point in a post above... they let KP back and he's a success then they get criticised for letting him go after the Ashes and not having him around for the World Cup... he doesn't do well, he can say that the dressing room is still divided etc and he wasn't made to fit in... a lot of downside for the ECB and a lot of upside for KP in that case. So I don't agree with you when you say the ECB/Straus was being decisive, Alec. The ECB made the rod for their back with their actions in 2014, post the Ashes and now its about face saving for them. Unfortunately for the ECB/Strauss, his >300* for Surrey and its timing was a bit of a fly-in-the-ointment
Chancho
Roar Rookie
Have they? TMS nearly have an article a day on it on their Face Book page... I'd say the KP issue hasn't moved on at all. Not sure I agree with the age thing, look at Brearley... ok KP's man management skill are a polar opposite, but if he gets runs and goes well then he could lift the team? And how many times do we see one player turn a team around on their own as well? But I guess it was too much of a risk for the ECB - if he came back in and was successful, then they'd have egg on their face for excluding him after the Ashes, especially after their World Cup. If he didn't do well, KP could say he wasn't really welcomed... no downside for KP. I think it just ECB set a terrible precedent; fit in or you're out. As a cricket fan, I would love to have seen KP stand up to Stark and MJ, and take them on... as an Australian, I'm glad he wont.
Alec Swann
Expert
Whether you agree with Andrew Strauss' decision, the surprise is that anybody expected anything different. The whole issue has never had anything to do with Kevin Pietersen's ability with bat in hand and it never will. What Colin Graves said to him, now that's another matter ...
Chancho
Roar Rookie
Yep, spot on. That's the way I see it as well. For all KP's faults and elements of his personality that we hear about which make him a handful, he has that ability to get results. Surely it's Strauss's job to harness that and manage it in a way to benefit the team. That's why I disagree with Alec's 'decisive' comment - this is not decisiveness, it's too personal for that. I just think that being told 'go back to County, get some runs and we'll have a think' and surpassing that expectation to be given a flat 'no' is pretty average behaviour.
Rich_UK
Guest
His first act was to continue the divide between England and its best batsman. I’m not too bothered as an Australian as KP is the only English batter i fear, but its just made the ECB look like an even bigger joke. ------ So they are a joke because they've decided to cut ties with a player they've got 10 years out of but who's off-field antics are no longer worth it. I'd they they've done a great job The continuation of the ‘boys brigade’ in English cricket will be its own downfall, and im loving every minute of it --------- You need to get out more mate!
13th Man
Guest
Nup Strauss is an idiot! why in the world would you close the door on a bloke that just scored 326 in county and is your countries highest run scorer, they might as well not bother showing up in Cardiff for the first test! England needed Michael Vaughan as there director of Cricket not conservative Strauss. Vaughan would have picked KP and would pick a more attacking captain, maybe KP as skipper or at least Joe Root. Cook, Strauss and friends are ruining English cricket. I used to have respect for the old foe, at least guys like Boycott, Botham, Flintoff and KP had fire in there belly, the current mob are soft as butter! RIP English Cricket...........again!