So Mickey Arthur is gone and Darren Lehmann has taken over
the reins of the Australian Cricket Team.
Because it’s sport we’ll all have our different opinions on
who, what, when and how things should have happened. Some of the deeper
thinkers amongst you may even add where into that equation.
There’s so much commentary going around about it in the
little bubble that is cricket land. People discussing who’s a good coach and
who isn’t, that Boof will save the Australian Team that the team deteriorated
under Mickey’s time in the role. Speculation everywhere on what’s wrong, who’s
good and what happened.
I have no idea what’s happened. Wasn’t in the rooms during
play, at team meetings, at training, on the team bus, at the bars or during the
hours and hours of flying that occurs for this particular team. More than
likely mistakes were made and things were not going that well. Whatever and
whoever was involved in this it reached a point where this change has occurred.
Who’s right, who’s wrong, everyone will have their say.
So in light of that I wanted to talk about what I know for
sure. That every coach and every person in every team is different. Whether
it’s You at home in front of the TV on Boxing Day telling Shane Watson and
Simon Katich to call properly during a mix up or “How did he drop that?!”, Tom
Moody trying to influence the field settings and bowling changes by running
gloves onto the field at the end of every over during a One-Day match, Darren
Berry being a meticulous planner and forthright with opinions or Tim Nielson
throwing to his batters one on one until he can’t stand up.
All different.
All open to praise and criticism in some way or another.
Opinions, everyone’s got them – some are just more influential than others.
It’s one very subjective industry.
We can’t all learn or be coached in the same way and in turn
not every coach can teach in every way. By nature coaches, teachers, managers,
captains etc. divide opinion. John Buchanan’s time as Coach of Queensland and
Australia saw titles and some of the biggest winning percentages in the history
of the game. Some players loved his preparation and providing of a multitude of
information and alternative thinking points….some not so much. Some players in
hindsight have suggested his abilities to motivate were brilliant, that making
people dislike him outwardly at times was something he did deliberately in
order for them to thrive off it. Only Buck would know for sure.
Some coaches are described as “old school”, some as hi-tech,
some high-touch. Coaches can be technically minded, have certain game specific
skills, some tend to be man managers over any type of technical or tactical
prowess. Some are people persons, some surly and fractious as to how they go
about their work. Coaches deal with Players in a range of forms,
administrators, ground staff, management, CEO’s and Boards – each of who have
their own opinions on why things are going well or not so well – this spectrum
is growing all the time. Many of these people also think that coaches win or
lose games in cricket. I understand that’s ultimately how they’re judged but I
would think that anyone who has played the game at all is unlikely to suggest
their coaches won or lost that many games during their playing time…unless you
need a scapegoat that is.
Did I like or agree with all of my coaches? Not a chance! Do
I blame them for my inability to play the ball moving back into my pads with
foot closed off and playing across the line more times than I care to remember?
I certainly do not.
And within all of the categories and styles that coaches can
fit into it also comes back to how they feel and coach. Do they enjoy the
overall feel in their squad or are they struggling with them and their overall
ideologies. What you see and want may not be what works for that particular
group. There is example after example we can go through:
·
Mickey Arthur with the South African side vs.
Mickey with this current Australian side.
·
John Buchanan with his Australia side vs. John
with his Middlesex team
·
Tom Moody coaching Sri Lanka vs. Tom Moody with
Western Australia
·
Shane Duff with the Sydney Thunder vs. Shane’s
other work at Grade Level
We could go on at length.
Are we different coaches with different teams? I would think
that’s highly unlikely. There are just different fits at different times with
different individuals and organisations – that’s a lot of “different”. It is the
players in teams that define the success and results of any particular team
with a coach helping or detracting depending on the fit, depending on the day
in question.
Darren Lehmann’s word carries a different type of weight to
Tim Coyle’s and I dare say they have a different skill set, so why not acknowledge
that first up. Does Martin Crowe’s cricket word carry a little more weight than
say Mike Hesson, Justin Langer’s more than Simon Helmot? No offence but of
course they do. Does that make them always right in everything across a coaching
spectrum vs. everyone else always wrong – I don’t think so.
Therefore the people making these appointments need to
understand what it is they want from their coach, staff and players and appoint
from there. Sometimes you’ll need more than just one type!
Do you need an authority figure, a disciplinarian, a skill
acquisition expert, people manager, program manager, someone who can use a
computer, write or speak well publicly, a bio-mechanical or tactical bowling expert?
These are the most important questions and I don’t think they are asked or
understood often enough. We certainly never say it out aloud. We talk about
coaching pathways without actually knowing what it is or what it looks like. We
need some honesty and transparency in our industry. It won’t always mean we win
top level matches but it will create a better understanding of what is required
and how we can help.
What will happen is some people will lean towards names that
they’ve heard of or remember because of their playing background and of course
this helps in some ways. But coaching is very different to playing and we are
all different types of coaches.
There is never one answer when it comes to who should be the
Coach of a team. All players will benefit and struggle in different ways under
each and every coach. Each coach will have a different concept of how he or she
will be involved and influence the group. No one is completely wrong or right
but there will be better “fits” for some than others.
So what Coaches and those who make decisions on them need is help.
A better understanding of what coaching is and how all of
our strengths and weaknesses fit. We need to educate our group of current, past
and future coaches, players, administrators and boards. Be honest in how
coaches fit into systems; make better use of their skills. Let’s have open
dialogue as to who is more likely to work at what level and why. Let’s also create a national system that
covers off pre-requisite topics for Coach Education courses whilst understanding
that delivery style and method will differ depending on who is delivering the
topic. It’s not creating robots; it’s creating a curriculum so that all of our
differences and abilities come through and can be used effectively when
coaching our International, State, 2nd XI, Grade or Under Age sides.
Every level of player needs understanding, learning, growth and sometimes
discipline. If we best help our youngest players it may even help keep their
interest at a time when our playing numbers are suffering and dexterity skills
are on the decline.
Then we need role descriptions that define the expectations
of each individual coach relating to what is expected of them with that
team/program. I say no to generic job descriptors that run through every HR
phrase in sport. Let’s be specific.
And here’s the kicker….. It then falls back to each
individual player to learn how he or she fits into their particular team at
that particular time and how around that they can get the best out of their
game. Cricket is a strange blend of group and individual. It has more variables
than most other sports that I can think of. Certainly the hierarchical nature
of the sport is no longer in existence.
I don’t know Darren Lehmann in great depth. Players past and
present respect him. He’s always been generous with his time and thoughts. He
has as broad a knowledge as anyone in the game. His ability to unite groups has
been one of his greatest selling points in amongst many other good ones. I hope
it all goes well for him and his new team. There’s no doubt they can win the
Ashes with some of the many variables going their way. I think he’ll do a great
job.
I do however know Mickey Arthur very well. He was my boss in
Perth. We didn’t always agree on how cricket and how cricketers should
play….who does? But we always agreed on the bigger and more important issues
that came with sport and life. He was generous and kind to me. He is my friend
and I am feeling for him right now.
