Oh, what a tangled web they weave

The ECB long since resembled less an administrative body than a Shakespearean tragedy, but even by their own Byzantine standards the last few days have really taken the biscuit. And there is more to come. If this is Macbeth, we are still only on Act Four. For all this saga’s twists and turns of bloody-handed usurpation and toxified king-making, perhaps, though, the Scottish play is a less fitting analogy than I, Claudius – with Livia tiptoeing past the corpses to plot her next defenestration.

The ceaseless, agonised contortions of English cricket stem from one simple root – the catastrophic failure in January 2014 to properly address the problems and challenges posed by the disastrous tour to Australia. That was the moment for rational, forensic and far-reaching analysis into what had gone wrong, who was responsible, and what were the solutions.

Instead, the ECB’s response took the form of a lazy, insular, heads-in-the-sand, and self-protective, whitewash. While the police cordoned-off the crash scene and chalked a white line around the dead body of English cricket, Giles Clarke grabbed a megaphone and yelled “there is nothing to see here – please move on” to anyone who dared ask awkward questions.

Clarke oversaw a response to the 2013/14 Ashes which amounted, in a nutshell, to “more of the same, with the same people”. Alastair Cook was encased in lead to protect him from radioactive fallout. The highest-scoring player was sacked, for no obvious reason beyond the creation of a sacrificial scapegoat. The vacancy for head coach was filled by a man whose re-appointment caused no inconvenience beyond reinstating his IT login and security pass.

There was no inquiry into what had gone wrong, no soul-searching or honest appraisal of whether the functioning and philosophy of Team England were remotely conducive to progress.

January 2014 was English cricket’s Treaty of Versailles – a sclerotic, recrimination-fuelled hatchet-job whose failure to resolve underlying problems made inevitable decades of further tension and conflict.

The ECB’s strategy, sixteen months ago, was so grievously flawed, so epically myopic, and so morally corrupt, that their consequences are not merely still being felt but continue to cause bloodshed, acrimony, and chaos.

From the moment Peter Moores was re-hired, the only possible outcome was that he would be sacked again, in ignominious and undignified circumstances. It was only a question of when. Turns out, in the end, that Moores wasn’t up to the job. Who knew?

Of all the possible candidates to replace Andy Flower, Moores was the only one who had been proven not to be good enough – having already been fired from the role once before. But he was also the only candidate guaranteed to provide continuity and doctrinal obedience.

From the moment the ECB decided the future was to be built around Alastair Cook, the only outcome was a team which continued to play in the same manner as the one which had lost five-nil to Australia: diffidently, incoherently, inflexibly, and apologetically. By sticking with a captain with so many question marks over his head, the ECB exposed him to a scrutiny and pressure which could only impair his batting form – plunging the team, meanwhile, into a perennial, exhausting fog of scrutiny, debate, and acrimony.

From the moment the ECB sacked Kevin Pietersen, they hamstrung and destabilised every aspect of Team England. Any result other than a victory invited the question – what if Pietersen had been playing? Any team-sheet invited the question – why isn’t Pietersen selected? Any managerial appointment was made on the condition that said manager agreed to endorse the Pietersen ban, which not only limited the field but condemned every official to authority-sapping inquisition and dissemblance. It was the cricketing equivalent of putting a prawn behind a curtain rail and then trying to rent out the flat.

From the moment the ECB refused to investigate why England lost the Ashes five-nil, they ensured that no lessons would be learned or progress made. Did England fail because their players were overworked, the coaching was misjudged, the selection awry or the feeder-system inadequate? Why did Australia perform better? Because these questions were never asked, no answers came forth, and the same mistakes were blindly repeated.

Paul Downton was hired as England’s managing director before the 2013/14 Ashes, but his appointment was cut from the same clannish, insular cloth as the post-series decision making. When the ECB had the option to harness the leadership and energy of a modern, outward-looking visionary, of significant international cricket experience, they instead chose an also-ran who’d spent the last twenty years following the game on Ceefax from his City office – but was rather good company on the golf course.

None of this is wisdom in hindsight. Thousands of observers made these very points at the very time the ECB were making these decisions. Those observers were generally derided and patronised by people close to the nexus of power, who felt entitled to imply – or even state – that they knew better than the great unwashed.

And what’s actually happened? In the sixteen months since that fateful January, only England’s test series win against India blots a copybook of abject and persistent failure. Paul Downton has been sacked. Peter Moores has been sacked. James Whitaker will soon be sacked.

England could have spent those sixteen months rebuilding, rethinking, and regenerating. Instead, while the side went round in circles, the ECB put their fingers in their ears and argued that black is white. Only now, at the eleventh hour, and under new management, has reality began to dawn  – with a panicked orgy of blood-letting and last-minute bandage application.

The ECB could so easily have given themselves nineteen months to properly prepare for the 2015 Ashes. Instead they have given themselves two months. In January 2014 the questions were: How do England recover to beat Australia? What will the new managing director do? Who will be the new coach? Will, and should, Cook continue as captain? A few weeks later, another question was added – can and will Kevin Pietersen return?

Tomorrow, Andrew Strauss and Tom Harrison – the newish ECB chief executive – will take questions at a press conference. And what will be on the agenda? How do England recover to beat Australia? What will the new managing director do? Who will be the new coach? Will Cook continue as captain? Will Kevin Pietersen return?