A England Cricket Coach For The Brexit Era

I wonder if Ashley Giles voted leave or remain? I normally stay clear of politics – and you won’t read anything remotely partisan in this article – but the assertion that the ECB’s managing director always wanted to appoint an English England cricket coach does make one wonder.

I bring this up because the debate surrounding Chris Silverwood’s somewhat controversial appointment has confused me. I had expected the debate to focus on England’s batting woes in test cricket – it’s the test team, after all, that Giles claimed he wanted to improve – but instead many observers are focusing on the nebulous and cheesy concept of team ‘culture’ plus some stuff about Silverwood’s nationality.

Tim Wigmore’s article in today’s Telegraph probably articulates these twin red herrings best. It’s a good article, as far as optimistic pieces welcoming a new coach go (Tim is an excellent sports writer), but I can’t help but roll my eyes slightly when I hear ECB employees espouse sentiments like this:

Giles has persistently emphasised the importance of culture since he took over as director of England men’s cricket. Silverwood is regarded as a safe custodian of the values that Giles wants England to embody – playing tough cricket on the field, but also being the most respected side in the world and a team with integrity on and off the field.

We’ve heard so much talk of culture over the last few years and it’s mostly hot air. Andrew Strauss always rabbitted endlessly about culture and it seems as though Ashley Giles is following him like the proverbial sheep. Perhaps Gilo thinks it makes him sound clever or progressive? Or maybe he just hasn’t got any ideas, or perhaps I should say cliches, of his own.

The problem, of course, is that the strong team culture England have apparently developed over the last few years has done sod all for the test team. It’s worked for the ODI team – although it almost led to the omission of Jofra Archer at one point – but ‘teamwork’ (in a game of individuals), and ‘systems’ (which suggests that cricket is some kind of accountancy software) hasn’t stopped England from being bowled out in under a session four times in the last two years.

Where was this famous team culture when Ireland rolled us over for 85 at Lord’s this summer? Where were the much heralded systems and processes when New Zealand knocked us over for 58; or when the West Indies sent us packing for 77; or when Australia had their way with us at Leeds and we could only post 67? How exactly is culture going to improve what is possibly the worst England test batting line up of all time – especially as Thorpe and Collingwood are set to continue in their respective roles?

Apparently, however, it matters not that England will be adding absolutely zero batting expertise to the coaching staff now that Silverwood is England cricket coach because – and I do hope Nigel Farage is reading this – Silverwood is English! Horray! Let’s all evoke the spirit of Aston, Blake, (Cuthbert) Collingwood, Drake, Effingham, Frobisher, and Grenville. That’ll put some runs on the board. We might even make triple figures this time.

As someone who isn’t particularly patriotic I find the fixation with appointing home grown coaches bizarre. I’d take Sven Goran Eriksson over Sam Allardyce every day of the week. I’d take Eddie Jones over Stuart Lancaster too. But I’d also take Jimmy Anderson over Dougie Bollinger. For me nationality is irrelevant. It’s all about picking the best man for the job. The rest is just political excreta.

I find it very strange, therefore, that so many supporters are welcoming the appointment of an inexperienced English bowling coach when what was desperately needed was a batting guru (of any nationality). Here’s more from Tim Wigmore:

England have been lambasted for the complete absence of any English head coaches in the men’s Hundred competition. This paucity of English coaches is nothing new … Giles has declared elevating more English coaches to be a priority. Given the first chance, he has been as good as his word. And so it is not only all England supporters who will wish Silverwood well in the years ahead; it is also the next generation of England coaches. For, should Silverwood succeed, he will make English coaches more attractive the world over.

Of course I understand that it’s preferable for England to produce good coaches. And I understand that some people will always prefer the England cricket coach to be English. But to be honest I’d rather just produce a credible test batting line up at this stage. The latter is surely more of a pressing concern.

The bottom line is that Gary Kirsten (or perhaps even Graham Ford who also has the added benefit of knowing county cricket as well as most) had the requisite experience and expertise to improve our batting performances. All Chris Silverwood promises is continuity and the reemphasising of a team culture that cannot possibly address the position of Jason Roy’s hands, the gap between Jonny Bairstow’s bat and pad, or Jos Buttler’s inability to score test hundreds.

Whereas many will see, for some intangible reason, that Silverwood’s nationality is an advantage, I see it as a distinct disadvantage. We keep hearing that Silverwood’s knowledge of county cricket can only be a good thing. But why? It’s not his job to pick the players. That’s up to the most quintessentially English Englishman of them all, Ed Smith.

What’s more, the great challenge our test team has faced, and continues to face, is winning abroad. That’s the mark of a quality test side. Having a head coach whose coaching experience is limited to good old Blighty (other than a quick stint in Zimbabwe) means there will be a something of a knowledge vacuum when England tour places like Australia and particularly Asia.

Although Trevor Bayliss’s record as England cricket coach was very mixed – another reason why a continuity candidate made no sense whatsoever – he did manage to win in Sri Lanka. This is partly because Bayliss is a former head coach of Sri Lanka who knew the conditions there inside out. Where, exactly, is Chris Silverwood’s experience going to help unless it’s a cloudy morning at Headlingley or Trent Bridge?

Now Ashley Giles is no fool. He can’t be a fool because he’s played ECB politics very cleverly over the years. He’s kept his head down, kept quiet when he thought he was treated unfairly, and he’s finally managed to land a job that’s even better than the one he’s craved his whole career. Consequently he can’t be oblivious to the compelling arguments above.

And that is why, with some nervousness and a facetious sense of humour, I asked whether Ashley Giles voted leave or remain in the 2016 referendum. Because nationality, and English jobs for English cricket coaches, has suddenly trumped all other considerations and I don’t understand why.

Let’s revitalise the great British cricket coaching industry folks. Let’s stop those foreign coaches from stealing our jobs. And most of all, in the words of the great populist from yonder, let’s make English cricket great again.

James Morgan

Get new article notifications via email

We keep your data private and never share it with third parties.

16 comments

  • I find it hard to believe he’d have voted leave. Among other things, it would encourage Basque and Catalonian separatists, which would hardly help his day job.

  • On the cricketing matters, I may be naive and/or old fashioned, but since you’ve correctly identified England’s problem (they can’t bat in tests) don’t you then appoint someone who knows how to bat in tests to coach them? Like, say, a 100 test veteran who was extremely good at playing the best opening bowlers in the world and had a great defensive technique? Instead they’ve appointed someone who makes Derek Pringle look like Gary Sobers

      • Given the amount of time England’s batsmen spend in the dressing room as opposed to the middle, they would have had time on their hands to teach him surely?

        Duncan Fletcher wasn’t English, and succeeded precisely because he (along with Nasser Hussain) *changed* the team’s culture, and you’d have thought the wheely bin might have noticed all that.

    • I’m not entirely convinced by this JW. Surely the batting coach is the person who has to get the batsmen to bat like batsmen, and the head coach’s job is different–otherwise why have both?

      Having said that, I would still have Kirsten–who is probably the most successful international coach around at the moment–over Silverwood any day, and I can’t help thinking that Giles has tried to be a little too cute here…or not challenged the ECB’s prevailing ethos enough. As Nasser Hussain said, Kirsten’s job would be to coach the England team, not to give the ECB a good interview. But he’s old-school and (to quote Dobell quoting “a source”), not a Powerpoint presentation kind of man, so that will have put an end to that one straightaway you’d have thought, given the ECB’s penchant for marketing drivel!

  • Call me old fashioned but shouldn’t players know how to bat before they get selected to bat for England? Then it should be more about tactics than mechanics. Name me one test batsman whose performance has transformed fundamentally while playing test cricket. If Silverwood’s appointment is one indicator of a plan to focus on the production line, then that can only be to the good. Culture eats strategy for breakfast especially where the latter is only perceived as a short term fix.

  • Still no the sure how Brexit got into the debate, but the whole thing reminds me of the Revie, Clough debacle perpetrated by the FA in the seventies. Revie was well respected but his success had been with a single group of players. In an era of mavericks, like Worthington, Currie, Hudson, Bowles, George and Marsh he advocated a conservative culture, even frowning on long hair as a subversive influence. The Leeds team sat around playing Bingo whilst the mavericks enjoyed a wine, women and song lifestyle. Revie had a well oiled machine at Leeds and players usually selected themselves. When it came to international management there was little of this and consequently he selected almost everyone suggested by the press, in an effort to placate criticism, but his players were impeccably behaved as they slipped down the world rankings.
    I’m not suggesting the players mimic this but as most of them are mature adult family men, the idea of the control freak culture, treating them like schoolboys is not a healthy one and is I think more likely to result in breakdowns than leaving the players to decide how to conduct themselves. As long as they are made aware of their responsibilities as role models and representatives of their country abroad this should be enough.
    The main problem is that administrators are not subject to the enormous pressure of public expectation in almost every facet of life as a touring cricketer. You are away from home for long periods, missing family and friends and cannot be expected to be a Boy Scout under these artificial conditions. You need to let off steam now and again. Giles always struck me as a conservative individual with few temperamental issues so although he may understand the pressures better than most, having been an England player on tour, he does not have the empathy with their effects on the Stokes of this world, though the New Zealand tour should be less of a problem for him than any of his colleagues.

  • Kirsten would have had nothing to do with Brexit. He’s not European or coached in Europe.

    Same with Lehmann, and one can only wonder why Jason Gillespie distanced himself even before Bayliss had finished.

  • “For me nationality is irrelevant”.

    Er, it is international sport. Nationality is the central organising principle. If nationality is irrelevant, how does it differ from franchise sport? The answer is it doesn’t and that’s the world that some want and that we’re heading for. Sport is going to become competing city states organised as privately-owned franchises. Not next week, not next year, but next decade is a distinct possibility.
    Quite why coaches are considered exempt from this I’ve never quite understood. I guess there’s a little justification for foreign coaches in new, small nations who haven’t managed to generate their own. In the second richest, fourth largest ICC full member there’s no justification at all. The big issues here are why isn’t Kirsten contributing to SA cricket and why can’t the ECB produce top quality English coaches? The latter can be kicked down the road by another quick fix as it has been for the last three decades. The ECB might just have to look at its own command-and-control culture and tick-box approaches if it couldn’t poach from overseas.

    “the values that Giles wants England to embody – playing tough cricket on the field, but also being the most respected side in the world and a team with integrity on and off the field”.

    They can keep a straight face saying this sort of thing with Facepuncher OBE as vice-captain? It truly is an inverted world. BTW someone really is on a campaign to redeem him with these stories “appearing” in the media about his family and then this nonsense supposed bust-up with his wife. The message: poor chap is just a media victim.

    < Last bit of comment moderated by nervous editor - sorry Simon. >

  • I agree that Kirsten , has more experience and an impressive record and certainly knows more about Silverwood about batting at test level. However are we reading too much into this (although the article is a well thought out piece).

    The report after the decision was made was Kirsten did not impress at interview could it be that he was asked the question “if the need arises are you prepared to work a full year on all forms of cricket for England”. As we know Kirsten has made it well know he would rather a part time role so he can spend time with his family, and his answer may have implied he would not be as committed as Giles and co wanted.

    I know when I have interviewed candidates you look for some long term commitment and loyalty from the candidate.

    Maybe the issue was the comments by Giles before the interviews where he implied that Kirsten was a strong candidate and little mention was made of Silverwood.

  • James, I’m not sure where Brexit and Nigel Farage comes in this analogy, unless you think it’s some kind of ‘Little Englander’ appointment of Silverwood? Nigel Farage’s estranged wife is German and as far as I know his current girlfriend is french.

    Having said all that I had hoped that the ECB would have gone with Kirsten. This appointment smacks of ‘a safe pair of hands’ instead of ability at the highest level of the game. The one thing this appointment does do is cement Joe Root as captain and I’m not sure he is up to that task either.

  • Well, congratulations James, you’re on fire at the moment. Some great points which I can only agree with.

FOLLOW US ON TWITTER

copywriter copywriting