I am going to get straight on the front foot with this issue when I say I was very surprised that Cricket Australia decided to extend Pat Howard’s contract for another two years as high performance manager.
Former Australian fast bowler Stuart Clark went one step further on Fox Sports’ Bill & Boz show, saying: “I wouldn’t have signed Pat Howard again – I wouldn’t have signed Pat Howard in the first place.
“I think he’s useless, personally.”
The easiest way to attack Howard’s appointment is to cite the fact that he never played high-level cricket and is an ex-rugby player. This is definitely a concern but I don’t think a lack of top-level experience should rule him out. Many coaches, managers and executives in all levels of sport are excellent in their roles without top-level experience.
But it does leave Pat Howard open as an easy target when things go wrong in Australian Cricket and surely putting an ex-first-class or Test cricketer in the role would be easier to market for Cricket Australia.
There must surely be an ex-player or top level coach who could be transitioned into the role who could bring a different skill set to the role and perhaps endear him or herself to the Australian cricket community a little more than Howard has done.
Shouldn’t the high performance manager at least have had some experience in coaching cricket? Isn’t there a pathway for a high performance manager to move through the cricketing ranks and not be seemingly plucked from nowhere?
Speaking about Howard’s contract extension James Sutherland, the CEO of Cricket Australia, was glowing.
“Pat is a dynamic, passionate executive and the board and I are delighted that he has agreed to extend his term.
“He has led the evolution of a new team performance structure and success-driven culture for both men’s and women’s cricket in Australia and we see his ongoing contribution as integral to our future plans.”
(AAP Image/Julian Smith)
With Howard’s contract up for renewal, it would have been the perfect time to move him out of the role and try someone else. I wonder what Steve Smith thinks about this?
My main concern about Howard’s reappointment has nothing to do with his prior experience in rugby but revolves around his inability to manage the Australian cricket team’s performance.
Let’s start with the Test team. It was under Howard’s watch that ‘Homeworkgate’ transpired and Australia had an embarrassing soap opera-style tour of India in 2013, complete with accusations and drama being played out in the media between Pat Howard and Shane Watson.
I guess some credit should be given to Howard for overseeing Mickey Arthur’s departure and installing Darren Lehmann in the lead-up to the 2013 Ashes, but Australia will have to live with the horrific memory of the 2013 tour of India for years to come.
But the on-field performance of the Test team is my greatest complaint. We have shown an inability to perform overseas consistently, having lost both 2013 and 2015 Ashes series in England. Our record on the subcontinent has got much worse under his reign despite the recent tour of India.
Last summer the Test team disintegrated in Hobart, resulting in a complete turnover of players and Rod Marsh stepping down as chairman of selectors.
The only Test series Australia have won recently are the ones we should win, at home against other teams that struggle in our conditions. The notable exception to that came in 2014 in South Africa.
We should be doing better and performing consistently better overseas. There is no shortage of talent in Australian cricket but is it being managed properly?
In my opinion, Howard has not set up a high performance structure that is working well. Some of my other gripes are Australia’s failure to come to terms with international T20 cricket, Greg Chappell’s appointment as a selector and seeing some of our best coaches move overseas.
Looking ahead Howard has two years to turn things around and prove all the doubters wrong. Will he make it to 2019?
Kathy
Guest
Excellent goods from you, man. I have take into accout your stuff prior to and you are just too wonderful. I really like what you've bought right here, really like what you're stating and the way in which by which you assert it. You're making it entertaining and you still care for to stay it sensible. I can't wait to read far more from you. This is really a great site.700
Don Freo
Guest
I missed the context of Clark's comment but if, by "useless" he means that Howard has no use, Clark is correct. Re-direct his pay into grass roots cricket.
Don Freo
Guest
Carters, regardless of his junior or senior efforts, is a very impressive young man. He is a fellow who could support his philanthropy with some writing and public speaking. Carters uses language beautifully.
Greg
Roar Rookie
It's hard finding positive outcomes from Pat's appointment. Players are still getting injured, we still suck at T20 and we rarely win overseas. I think those are the main aspects of performance that Pat was hired to rectify. However, I think poor selections, a jam-packed international schedule, and flat pitches in Australia have had a part to play too.
Rellum
Roar Guru
You would have to remind me as I don't follow Rugby....sorry :). Cricket is a sport, not a business, despite James Sutherlands best intentions, so I do not think the CEO example matches up, but I understand your position.
Bakkies
Guest
Clark was a very important player in a series win in South Africa and the 5-0 whitewash of England to regain the Ashes.
Bakkies
Guest
'I actually found the whole saga at the time pretty surreal . I mean Arthur coached guys like Kallis , Gary Kirsten , Herschelle Gibbs and I would be staggered if they would have accepted a homework task either' Those players were performing and had the right mental attitude. The Australian players were political, under performing and throwing the towel in. That Indian series was an embarrassment.
davSA
Guest
Took me a while to respond Rellum . Better late than never. ...I kind of hear your sentiments but same time don't fully agree. If an Aussie business for example is looking for a new CEO and the best applicant is a foreigner ,, why not ?? If I were to reverse the roles a bit and and Aussie rugby coach were to put up his hand to coach The Springboks ( lets say an Eddie Jones ) I cannot see why being Australian should disqualify him.. ( Actually he did coach us as an assistant in the 2007 world cup ) which I don't have to remind you we won.
Stump Mike
Guest
Correct. I'd rather have a gentleman from a private All-Boys college over some half baked bogan from a low -brow public school any day. I'm not sure why some roarers insist on having a go at respectable people simply for having a decent education. Should a supermodel apologise for being beautiful ???
Stump Mike
Guest
Correct. I'd rather have a gentleman from a private All-Boys college over some half baked bogan from a low -brow public school any day. I'm not sure why some roarers insist on having a go at respectable people simply for having a decent education. Should a supermodel apologise for being beautiful ???
Jack
Guest
He was GM of The Sydney Sixers and has played test cricket, he therefore has admin experience and playing experience at the highest levels of aus cricket so actually would know more then most what he is talking about on this issue. His name is spelt Clark by the way
Jack
Guest
Stuart Clark ran the Sydney Sixers for 3-4 years as GM and played test cricket, he has experience on both sides of the fence and does actually know how to pick the right people. His opinion actually has quite a bit of weight because of his unique experience
Jack
Guest
He absolutely is in charge of the competitions it's specifically in his job description, He even gets a say as to how junior competitions should be run and setup. Players being allowed to subbed in and out sheild games became allowed in the name of his rotation policy. The 2nd XI comp was basically turned into an under 23's league which is why they now can only pick people on potential because if your over 23 and can't get in a state team because of the pick on potential policy all you have now is grade cricket. Mis ah ul haq is 43 and only just retired from the Pakistan captaincy and team and we are chucking out people at 25. Original point Pat Howard has a say over all forms of organised cricket at all levels over all Australia in some form or another.
Nudge
Guest
Wow, what a load of rambling which no one would give two hoots about. Apart from the laugh
qwetzen
Guest
DaveSA, I don't have a persecution complex. They ARE after me...
davSA
Guest
Ha Ha . I think you may have a persecution complex qwetzen . I was not referring to you but to the AUS Cricket management . Apologies if it looked that way.
Rellum
Roar Guru
Only a Australian coach should coach Australia as we our the best cricketing nation in the History of the sport. If we cannot produce our own coaches who are as good or better than anyone else then something is seriously wrong. It would be like an Englishman coaching the Brazilian Football team. I never though Arthur should have got the job but the guy was on a very difficult wicket, having to deal with the argus report recommendations, Clarke would have been a nightmare for anyone (The team slid down under him and has started to recover since he left), Watson and other ego's, a rebuilding team. The Aus dressing room is all about ego's and politics something I don't think Arthur was suited for.
qwetzen
Guest
"I find that approach really insular and a bit isolationist qwetzen ." Hey! Don't shoot the messenger.
qwetzen
Guest
Definitions of "burly" from reputable dictionaries. (Some of us prefer to quote sources Ronan) "strongly and heavily built" - Miriam-Webster "A burly man has a broad body and strong muscles." - Collins dictionary "(of a person) large and strong; heavily built" - Oxforddictionaries "a burly man is fat and strong" - Macmillandictionaries "A burly man is large and strong:" - Cambridge So I'll stand by by criticism of Dave Middleton thanks all the same. "Retrospectives of a cricketer’s professional career very rarely delve into their junior cricket days". In your opinion. And I'd suggest that any retrospective which failed to mention that its subject made not one but two Australian age sides wouldn't be much of a retrospective. Also, I said that Carters was "a Canberra boy", so there's more to it than simply his "junior" cricket. Or are you suggesting that it's "very rare" for retrospectives to mention where players were born and raised? Anyway; "Carters was born and raised in Canberra and played his youth cricket in the ACT under-age sides, before moving to Victoria to begin his state career." http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia/content/story/1097389.html "Carters' journey started in the Cricket ACT junior ranks before helping Wests-UC win a premiership alongside Australian Test spinner Nathan Lyon." https://tinyurl.com/l5h9l3j (SMH) "The Canberra-born cricketer," https://tinyurl.com/km2z3dh (Cricbuzz) "Bit of an embarrassment yourself there quetzen!" Jaysus Ronan! If it's "embarrassment" you want have a look at that sentence of yours. A garbled mess *and* you got my nick wrong! And regarding the whole exchange, I'll leave it to the individual to decide who's got embarrassment all over their face. Look Ronan, this habit of yours of popping up to snipe whenever you think you can score a point but refusing to respond to "embarrassing" enquiries is tiresome. If you want to keep doing it then that's your choice. I'm moving on.
davSA
Guest
I find that approach really insular and a bit isolationist qwetzen . It is the kind of stuff we expect from our brain dead politicians here in South Africa , "Only a South African can understand us to coach here "of course completely ignoring the fact that the finest cricket coach we ever had was Bob Woolmer , a Pom. I mean Gary Kirsten coached India with tremendous success and can you imagine the culture divide that he had to "understand".