Pat Howard under pressure as Aussie cricket team faces 'worst ever' tag

Arthur is at it again. Why do you write these lengthy diatribes that have nothing to do with the topic and promote your business at the end of them? If you've got something to say, post an article. Don't spam us.

load comments

When CA created the Team performance role in 2011 they probably thought it was progressive thinking to go outside the square and appoint someone from a non cricketing background. But for such an all-encompassing role you really need somebody with a cricket background. Mark Taylor would have fitted the bill. Also I wonder if the same amount of time and technology is spent coaching batsmen as it is with bowlers. Bowling coaches are certainly more high profile and talked about in the media. Batting techniques should be analysed and assessed the same way that a golf swing is. Utilise technology to identify the flaws and correct them.

Pat Howard would be the first name on the list I would remove, I can't be bother again listing all he failures but his influence not only on the Australian squad but more specifically his influence over the domestic game has set the game back years.

do you understand what management do in organisations?

"Vice-captain Steve Smith even boldly claimed in April that England ‘wouldn’t come close’ to beating his side." To be fair, his exact quote was, "If we keep playing like we have been, England won't come close to us." Apart from Lord's, they certainly didn't play anywhere near as well as they did in the World Cup, or against India - for some reason they just couldn't click. That was the most disappointing thing, really - we were capable of doing 10x better than we did and we just couldn't get it together.

They manage all facets of it. If you give every person a voice you will never get anywhere as they will all prioritize their own agenda to ensure their job is done the best. You need to make compromises and somebody needs to manage that. Howard would likely be in charge of budget to and have to manage Lehman's logistics requests against the budget and be responsible for that. You clearly can't or just plain don't want to understand so try and make is sound as ambiguous as you can. There's really no point discussing this with you any further.

"Fitness, injury management and rehabilitation, etc" If Howard is looking after all these things, what do these guys do? Strength & Conditioning coach: Damian Mednis Team physiotherapist: Alex Kountouris Team doctor: Peter Brukner

"If the selectors have nobody fit and available to select, that’s Howard’s fault" Not the medical staff?

Sounds like a whole bunch of consultant speak to me - "action these requests"...dear Lord! And shouldn't a medical person be in change of injury management and rehab? The coach says to the doc - "so and so has a bung knee - get him back on the paddock as quickly as possible thanks". Not sure why you need a High Performance Manager to get involved in that conversation...

It's actually a bit hard to tell if they've regressed in English conditions since 2013 because they didn't play in English conditions in 2013. They fell into the thought of producing slow turners as the best way to beat Australia, and that's what they produced. Australia didn't play on any pitches like these last two tests the last time they were in England. They may have been just as bad in these conditions then if they were tested in them, we just don't know. England again fell for trying the slow, dry pitches with no grass for the first couple of tests and only after the big loss at Lords did they then decide to try reverting back to true English conditions and see how they go.

Because he doesn't coach the team. He's job is to ensure the team are able to be best prepared. Fitness, injury management and rehabilitation, etc. If the selectors make the wrong choices or following the wrong tactics that's nothing to do with Howard. If the selectors have nobody fit and available to select, that's Howard's fault.

Cannot for the life of me figure out what Pat Howard's role actually adds to the national set up? Surely it is the job of the administration to ensure that the right coaching set up is in place such that all areas of the game are addressed (technical, health and rehabilitation, etc.). When Mickey Arthur was dismissed it seemed, rightly or wrongly, that Pat Howard played a big part in the decision. How can the High Performance Manager not be ultimately responsible for the performance of the international side? For someone that is meant to add value in improving the team's performance (I presume??) he seems to escape scrutiny when the team is under performing. Granted we have just won the world cup but there have been signs of a decline in the test side for quite a while now.

since 2010 they've gone for 88 vs Pak 98 vs Eng, 47 vs SA and now 60. Possibly on a par with some 1880s - 1912 efforts but worse than the establishment 1977 - 79 team during WSC.

Makes you wonder why Australia agreed to tour Bangladesh, a move that has ruined the early part of our domestic season Questions also have to be asked as to why we have agreed to host the Windies this summer (including giving them the Boxing Day test) when literally no-one wants to see them play We have also destroyed the latter part of our domestic season by agreeing to tour NZ In short, there are 2 sides to every story

Arthur, when South Africa and other nations protested about this issue, not a peep was heard from Australians, and I don't believe many will be interested now. Clearly the money paid to some, and the power which comes with it, overrides all sense of what's right and good. And I don't expect you'll get many protestations from fans either - all they care about is whether the team wins or not. I predicted that Srini and co will destroy cricket as we know it.

English reporter Quention McDermott got a front row seat on “Four Corners” last night regarding the scandal involving India, Australia and England’s ongoing monopoly of the ICC. The programme was essentially a rehash of the corruption cases involving Nara Srinivasan, BCCI former Chairman and now Chairman on hold at the ICC. Ian Chappell, Michael Holding and Gideon Haigh spoke forcefully and eloquently about the Money Funds Takeover by the BCCI, ECB and CA which is damaging the ICC’s reputation as a body looking to expand and develop cricket all over the world. The over-riding debate seems to centre around the fact that India were sick and tired of bankrolling 75% of the costs of running the ICC. They proposed that they wanted the ability to corner the scheduling of tours, World Cups and matches involving India. Then Chairman Srinivasan enlisted CA Chairman Wally Edwards, former test Cricketer from WA, and others to appease some of the Member Countries with promises of funds via tours approved by the ICC. The message apparently was crystal clear. Support the ICC’s proposal that India, Australia and England arrange all scheduling of matches…or face the prospect of not having any of these 3 nations tour their country, or the 3 countries. Further, scheduling involving Member Nations of any kind might be with-held. By cornering the market in T20 via the IPL, Indian Cricket was able to build a war chest of what former BCCI VP, Lallit Modi says amounted to almost 8 billion dollars. Srinivasan and his son-in-law were then banned from the BCCI and cricket in general via findings of an Indian Anti-Corruption body. Accusations that Srinivasan, Owner of India Cement, has pocketed millions, if not billions from the various arrangements since 2008 have cast his ICC Chairman’s role in a preposterous position. Modi has proposed an opposing Test Match and Limited Overs World Cricket regime with world wide television rights and multi million dollar player contracts, but is scarce on detail. The ICC, he says has, 3 snakes…India, England and Australia, and Chappell went as far as to insinuate that all 3 had their “snout in the trough,” a reference to the inferred amounts of $700 million that India has made out of the 2014 “treaty of cricket”, which also guaranteed England and Australia some 300 million each. As long ago as 2008, and between 2012 and 2014, several Reports commissioned by the ICC had recommended an Independent Chairman and 3 Commissioners be appointed to run the scheduling and overall expansion and development of Cricket under the ICC’s banner. This move was quickly opposed by Srinivasan and defeated in such a way that the voting power of each Member Nation was effectively overturned. Last night’s report is damning of Edwards, Giles Clarke and Srinivasan as head of CA, the ECB and BCCI at the time. There were strong inferences of collusion, forceful treatment of smaller Member Nations…and dismissal of any thoughts that the ICC might start a World Cricket League whereby Member nations played Home and Away series in 3 forms of the game. Pakistan, South Africa, NZ, the Windies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Ireland and Zimbabwe are said to be totally against the new Regime of the Snakes as Modi put it. So as the Ashes departs our shores, Australian cricket is again being cast in a negative light. Instead of agitating for an Independent Commission to run the game, Australia has sided with India and England so it can dominate the scheduling and the distribution of funds. By doing so, that cartel is trying to appease the BCCI so it will continue to devote IPL revenues to the ICC, and so the BCCI will not pull out of the ICC itself. It would seem quite stupid for India to do that. The IPL and BCCI make several billion dollars minimum per annum from IPL, World Cups, Tours and Television rights. The exit of 8 Member Nations from the ICC would leave the 3 Major Nations with only themselves to play against. The only way that Cricket can go forward with every Member Nation in agreement is if an Independent Commission is charged with creating a schedule for home and away Series for 8-11 Member nations (World Cricket League), and expands the game in the 90 Affiliate Nations so that T20 and 50 over Leagues are created. Anything less than that would see the cricket world in turmoil between now and 2019 when only 10 nations are due to attend the ODI World Cup. On the face of it, the Four Corners Report and recent ESPN revelations show that cricket has some 2.5 billion followers throughout the world, and tens of millions of players in men and women and children’s ranks. Spreading of the wealth to ensure these 100 nations develop cricket within themselves to the maximum would seem to be the logical path for Cricket to take. It would seem that ICC Cricket is standing on the abyss with the Unholy Triumvate pushing the game over the edge, and tripping in after it! It is to be hoped that the Member nations can convince England , Australia and India to come to their senses and put the game, all Member Nations and the games’ expansion on an equal footing. ARTHUR PAGONIS MANAGING DIRECTOR AUSTRALIA GLOBAL TRADING PTY LTD 10 HERTZ WAY, MORLEY, W.A. 6062 AUSTRALIA PH. 61.8.9377 3833, FAX 61.8.93773877, MOBILE 61. 409918874 SKYPE: apagonis2 WEB: www.ausglobaltrading.com

It would diminish the professional structures in place. As High Performance Manager he would be responsibility for injury management and rehabilitation, training programs, etc. He would like get feedback from the coaching staff on what they want and action these requests to deliver a professional program. It's almost like the administration side of coaching to a degree.

I'm still at a loss as to what Pat Howard actually does. Here's a question - if his position was to be made redundant, what effect would it have?

Howard seems fairly clueless, and the 60 all out was abysmal, but worst ever? Give me a break. It's pretty much the same team that administered an Ashes whitewash a year and a half ago. The worst ever would struggle to win at home or away. The biggest issue - our lack of batting depth - is probably not Howard's fault either