Cricket coaches are simply too funny to get rid of

By Dan Liebke / Expert

As Shane Warne has opined on many occasions in between talking about dirty rotten pizzas, the American Pie movies and whatever other topics might pass through his mind instead of the cricket he’s supposed to be commentating on, the only good coach is the one that takes the players to the ground.

Good wordplay areas from Warnie there, as he toys with our expectation that he’s talking about an individual who provides support, training and guidance for the team and then subverts it by revealing that he is, in fact, referring to the team bus.

But Shane Warne’s distaste for international cricket coaches is not founded solely on his desire to unleash recycled Ian Chappell zingers at us. No, over the years he’s developed his case against coaches using well-reasoned arguments built on solid evidence and irrefutable logic.

Ha ha ha! No, of course not. It’s just that he hates former coach John Buchanan. Nobody else can quite remember why, but it’s probably got something to do with the fact that Buchanan was mates with Steve Waugh, who, as you probably recall from I’m A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here, selfishly dropped an out-of-form Warne for a must-win Test that Australia then went on to win.

Also, Buchanan is clearly a total nerd. So there’s that too.

Warne did ease up on coaches slightly in his legendary ‘Warnifesto’ back in 2013, where he called for Darren Lehmann to be the Australian coach. But, sadly, the hope that Lehmann might be some kind of cool, Fonziesque coach faded when Boof started doing horrid things to Michael Clarke. Y’know, like suggesting maybe he shouldn’t play if he had a dud hamstring.

But other sports have shown that the national coach need not necessarily be just a target for the misguided bile of vendetta-driven former players.

After all, how would the Australian rugby league team have fared against the Kiwis the other night without coach Mal Meninga’s vast experience in defeating opposition teams whose names start with ‘New’?

Would the Socceroos get quite so many Google hits without sports journalists continually checking that they’re spelling coach Ange Postecoglou’s (did I get it right? Let me just check that…) name correctly?

And when AFL’s finest unite in the national team to take on other countries at Australian Rules football, who is more important than the theoretical coach of this imaginary team? Nobody, that’s who.

International cricket coaches deserve to be treated with just as much respect as their football coded counterparts, especially given that a couple of them have been in the news this week.

Former Australian coach Mickey Arthur was the first to make headlines when he was announced as the new coach of Pakistan. Arthur is perhaps best remembered these days for his part in the HomeworkGate scandal during Australia’s tour of India in 2013 when Shane Watson, James Pattinson, Mitchell Johnson and Usman Khawaja were infamously suspended from the Third Test for failing to complete their pre-Test homework.

Hopefully Arthur’s learnt something from this. Namely, that you shouldn’t expect players earning hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to perform simple tasks that you request of them.

Luckily, nobody in Pakistan is on anything like that kind of money so he should be fine.

And, even if he isn’t, then that lack of fineness will presumably lead to at least half a dozen manifestos from former Pakistan champions and how much fun will that be for cricket fans? An Akramifesto? A Miandadifesto? Imranifesto? Inzamamifesto? The opportunities are endlessly entertaining.

But not, apparently, as entertaining as watching your team lose the Ashes in a whitewash. Because Andy Flower was also in the news during the week, discussing England’s Ashes tour of 2013-14, an experience he described as ‘fascinating’.

I must say, I totally love the idea that Flower spent the entire tour sitting in the dressing room, fingers steepled in front of his chin, eyes never wavering from the action, muttering ‘fascinating’ to himself over and over as the England team imploded around him.

“What’s that, Alastair? You all hate KP? Fascinating, fascinating.”

“None of you have any idea how to play Mitch Johnson? How utterly compelling.”

“Another Test lost in three days? Intriguing.”

“Well, well, well. A 5-0 Ashes defeat that will inevitably lead to me being sacked? Gripping stuff.”

Now, I ask you, could a bus ever be so fascinated watching its team lose the Ashes? Oh, sure. Maybe one of those new-fangled Google smart buses. After all, who knows what those futuristic marvels will be capable of?

But until such artificially intelligent vehicles are commonplace in world cricket, only a human coach will be able to provide this kind of comedy material. And that’s why those coaches deserve our respect.

Sorry, Warnie. Feel more than completely free to commence a petty vendetta against me.

The Crowd Says:

2016-05-10T19:20:03+00:00

Bakkies

Guest


' however, the coach should let the captain run the show on the field and have a team he is comfortable with' That's one part of the game but there's the stuff in the dressing room too when the team is batting. The coach takes the weight off the captain who is preparing to bat by talking to other players who have just got out (and some lose the rag). The captain loses focus on his own job when he is trying to defuse situations or ensuring that his team mates don't get in a mental slump. There's also tactics involved with declarations, run chases that the coach advises on.

2016-05-10T19:14:30+00:00

Bakkies

Guest


They do need a coach in test cricket. I do believe there is too much focus and emphasis on the captain in Cricket as it is. That's why we see so many of them have bad form slumps trying to perform in the role they were first selected to. There is far more to the captain's role than what we see out the field and having a coach takes the slack off the captain in the off field roles.

2016-05-10T19:10:37+00:00

Bakkies

Guest


Rod Macqueen used to do with his Rugby teams that he would create a player driven environment where the players are being honest about what there strengths and weaknesses are. He was putting the onus out towards them as they certainly weren't putting out honest performances on that tour.

2016-05-10T04:58:40+00:00

Christov

Guest


I think coaches are necessary for taking the burden of selection and training/team management from the captain. I was captain for two seasons and the amount of work getting 11 people to play, as well as ensuring the team kit and team went to training was exhaustive (sorry if others find it easy). So, in my mind, a coach should organise the team, run training and give advice to their knowledge or guide them to those who do (former players etc). however, the coach should let the captain run the show on the field and have a team he is comfortable with - that is essentially it for the elite level. In junior and grade level coaches can be the difference between an average of 20 or an average of 30. They assist in finding how you can score runs/take wickets. Elite players already know, they just need a little advice now and again.

2016-05-09T12:32:23+00:00

Carl Spackler

Guest


Mickey Arthur was doing the job the way he saw fit, my question is who was the clown that appointed him in the first place? I believe he is still in charge and making a good dollar gumming up things.

2016-05-09T07:25:11+00:00

Annoyedofit

Guest


"A coach is someone who can improve technique and augment performance using his own experience as an example". Another reason why "homework gate" was even more farcical. Mickey Arthur was essentially asking the players to do HIS job instead of their own

2016-05-09T01:40:58+00:00

Simoc

Guest


Test cricketers don't need a coach. They have heaps of time to talk among themselves. There is never a shortage of experts giving an opinion. In T20 the coach is vital and in ODIs very handy.

2016-05-09T00:40:54+00:00

Carl Spackler

Guest


The term of the title 'coach' is incorrect in my opinion. What they actually are is team co-ordinators or managers. A coach is someone who can improve technique and augment performance using his own experience as an example. If I was playing for Australia I would want Greg Chappell or Ricky Ponting as a coach for batting, maybe even drill down further and get specific batting coaches for specific shots. For example Ponting's hook shot or Chappell's drives. But these team coaches were brought in after Greg Chappell complained so much and ended up getting his brother Trevor to bowl that underarm ball to the Kiwis in order to send the ACB a message he needed assistance. So, a coach's job is to steer the team off field in consultation with the captain to take away some of the burden of the skipper's role. Saying they are vital is laughable. When did a coach ever hit a ball or bowl a ball?

Read more at The Roar