Fletcher expected to quit as England coach by BBC

[GIMH]

What???

Can you please explain??? I saw them get smacked 0- 5 in the recent Ashes?

Objectively speaking, not really a sound platform for future test success.

Worst post?

 

[Richard]

You're really making a broader point about sports coaches there. I think it's true that they get too much of the praise when things go well & too much of the blame when they don't. However given that, rightly or wrongly, coaches are judged on results sooner or later someone on the board of a club or country will have to make the decision as to whether a coach can take the side any further.

Except that, as I say, it's not a case of finite definition as to how far a coach can take a side, especially a cricket one where personnel change.

They'd almost certainly have tarnished their reputations further. They weren't isolated failures, rather (like the world cup for Fletcher) the culmination of slow downward spirals.

I don't think so. What goes down must come up and vice-versa.

WRT Ferguson, save the garlands for a little while. He hasn't won anything yet this season.

But he's still managed to challenge Abramovitch's pockets, which before this season I'd thought was impossible. That in itself is a huge achievement.

Again, I made no mention of partying, too hard or otherwise. I said we spent too long congratulating ourselves. I really meant in the sense that we took our eyes off the prize, if you like. I think, in retrospect, the 05 Ashes was the event which allowed our players to believe they'd made it (not without some justification) but they haven't been able to push on to the next level.

Partying, congratulating, you know perfectly well what I mean.

I don't believe any player thought they'd made it - not one. The side went backwards from that series onwards because of loss of key personnel, not poor attitude from players.

 

[Richard]

Well, fair effort us beating SA & all, but even as a Pom I'd have to say we had what might charitably be called the rub of the green in that series. Any yarpies might have stronger opinions as to some of the umpiring decisions.

England actually lost more wickets to contentuous decisions in that series than SA did.

A draw might have been a fairer result, but that triumph was one of the most uplifting in English cricket history.

 

[Richard]

Harmison has for the large part of the last year been far worse than what he can be. Its one thing when his one-dimensional bowling is brought up, but when he continues to spray the ball over the park, something that we rarely saw during the 2004 and 2005 summer then you really have to question whats going. Even in the Ashes, in his first 2 tests he was significantly worse than he was in the last 3(which is more like the sort of performances that you'd expect from him) which begs the question about preparation. Maybe Kevin Shine deserves some or most of this criticism along with Harmison itself but the fact is that he should have been ready, fit and well done before what should have been the biggest series of his career.

Harmison simply isn't good enough - he's sprayed the ball all over the park just about every time he's bowled in Test cricket bar those first 7 Tests of 2004, and even then he still didn't bowl many wicket-taking deliveries. He bowled absolute rubbish in summer 2005 too, even at Lord's most of his wickets came at the end of the innings, and to suggest he bowled remotely well in the Second to Fifth Tests would take a lunatic.

As for the most recent Ashes - if 43-164-5, 28-69-2 and 28-93-2 (his performances in the last 3 Tests) is really all we should expect from him it says it all IMO.

 

[chris.hinton]

First and foremost Duncan Fletcher has been excellent for English cricket. The counties no longer dicate becasue of Him, he introduced Central Contracts and above all he won the Ashes in 2005.

We have gone from 9th to 2nd under him.

But sadly he was past his sell by date his selection left a lot to be desired and results start to show he was losing the plot. Our one day form however has been average under him

Now we must wait and see if Vaughan (ODI) resigns, Graveney and Above all The ECB Chairman David Morgan if they resign.I hope Morgon goes because English cricket has got worse since he took over McLaurlin

 

[GIMH]

Thought we'd see you in this thread before long

I, personally, don't think that Vaughan will choose to resign half the captaincy

 

[Richard]

I'm not anti-David Morgan but I do think things might have been better had we kept Ian MacLaurin at the helm.

As with Duncan Fletcher I still hold (almost certainly wholly futile) hopes that one day we'll see him back.

 

[Poker Boy]

Fletcher's overrated.

England beat a good SA side at home in 98 a year before he came.

Even the clown David Lloyd oversaw a closer Ashes series than Fletcher managed in 3 out of his 4 attempts.

The win in 1998 was due to luck, umpiring, and SA choking (should really have gone 2-0 up at OT - and any team with Gerry Liebenberg as an opener cannot be called good.Worst opening batsman ever. Made Tim Curtis look like Matt Hayden) As for Bumble's efforts in the Ashes, in 1997 we ambushed an under-cooked Australia at Edgbaston. But for rain at Lord's and an Aussie run chase **** up at the Oval it would have been 5-1 Australia. In 1998-99 if it hadn't been for rain at the 'Gabba and another Aussie run chase ****-up it would have been 5-0 Australia. Not exactly closer (and remember the Aussies didn't have the revenge factor that made them so keen to win the last Ashes 5-0.) And I don't remember us winning in Pakistan, SA or SL pre-Fletcher (I discount WI as that team were far worse in 2004 than they were pre-Fletcher)

 

[Richard]

Don't forget:
a) it should have been 1-1 going into the Old Trafford Test in 1998 - we'd almost certainly have won at Edgbaston but for the last day being washed-out.
b) had Waugh been given lbw (which he should have been) at Old Trafford and Elliott caught at Headingley in 1997 (which he unquestionably should have been) we could quite easily have won both games, and with them the series.

 

[Poker Boy]

About Edgbaston 1998...maybe but we were a bowler short so Gus Fraser and Cork would have had to bowl out a team with Klusner at No 9 (which cancels out Liebenberg !) by themselves. The way Ealham and Croft bowled in that series did not suggest support from them would have been forthcoming. And as for umpiring, well if Nasser had been given out lbw early on second day at Edgbaston we might not have got that big first innings lead...

 

[Richard]

Haha, don't remember Hussain getting a let-off at Edgbaston.

Given the way Fraser and Cork bowled for most of that summer I had full confidence they'd have knocked even a powerful batting side the SAfricans over.

 

[Spitfires_Fan]

Moores has been appointed as new coach on a permanent basis

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/6573813.stm

 

[steds]

But he's still managed to challenge Abramovitch's pockets

With a side containing huge bargains such as Ronaldo, Rooney, Saha, Ferdinand and Carrick?

 

[Richard]

Compare those costs to those that the Chelskis have spent, then...

 

[BoyBrumby]

And you DIDN't get the rub of the green in the 05 Ashes? I would think that series was probably the epitome of the term.

And 97 or 99 Ashes, take your pick. Both were improvements on the vast majority of Fletcher's Ashes nightmare,

I wasn't suggesting that we didn't get a bit of luck in 2005. TBF tho, the luck we got was really McGrath stepping on that ball, not some of the rank bad umpiring decisions the saffies seemed to get in 1998.

& the 1999 Ashes? Do me a lemon; one test with the urn gone. We've been having our arses handed to us for the better part of two decades, which is why 2005 (rub of green or no) is so fondly recalled.

Except that, as I say, it's not a case of finite definition as to how far a coach can take a side, especially a cricket one where personnel change.

So what are you suggesting? That no coach is accountable & they should never be changed? Sooner or later someone has to make a judgement call, regimes become stale & a change becomes not merely desireable, but necessary.

I don't think so. What goes down must come up and vice-versa.

That's just a BS cliche & I hope you know it. If sport or life was so deterministic there'd be no point doing anything positive.

But he's still managed to challenge Abramovitch's pockets, which before this season I'd thought was impossible. That in itself is a huge achievement.

Cobblers. ManUre are hardly paupers, are they?

Partying, congratulating, you know perfectly well what I mean.

I don't believe any player thought they'd made it - not one. The side went backwards from that series onwards because of loss of key personnel, not poor attitude from players.

As I suggested before, not all of our players were injured, some merely failed to match their previous performances. Where performances dip it has to be within the coach's remit as to address the reasons as to why.

 

[Richard]

So what are you suggesting? That no coach is accountable & they should never be changed? Sooner or later someone has to make a judgement call, regimes become stale & a change becomes not merely desireable, but necessary.

I'm suggesting that a coach should not be changed simply because he's been in charge for X time. Which is about the only reason anyone has come-up with for ditching Duncan Fletcher - had he been in the job for, say, 2 years, no-one would have been calling for his head.

That's just a BS cliche & I hope you know it. If sport or life was so deterministic there'd be no point doing anything positive.

It's a cliche that has meaning. If someone is given a chance to address a failing, they can do so. If they're not, of course, they can't. Duncan Fletcher was not given the chance.

Cobblers. ManUre are hardly paupers, are they?

Compared to Chelskis, yes.

As I suggested before, not all of our players were injured, some merely failed to match their previous performances. Where performances dip it has to be within the coach's remit as to address the reasons as to why.

No, as far as I'm concerned, players get found-out and sometimes a coach can't do anything about that. No coach can stop opposition pitching the ball up to Andrew Strauss, catching chances off Marcus Trescothick, bowling accurately at Andrew Flintoff and Geraint Jones, or not preparing turning pitches for Ashley Giles.

I don't blame Duncan Fletcher for any of those.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I'm suggesting that a coach should not be changed simply because he's been in charge for X time. Which is about the only reason anyone has come-up with for ditching Duncan Fletcher - had he been in the job for, say, 2 years, no-one would have been calling for his head.

You're beyond parody sometimes. If Fletcher had been in charge for 2 years his Ashes win would've looked like a massive fluke given our results since, so yes they would & possibly more so.

It's a cliche that has meaning. If someone is given a chance to address a failing, they can do so. If they're not, of course, they can't. Duncan Fletcher was not given the chance.

No it doesn't, because things don't always improve. Look at where Nottingham Forest are now...

Compared to Chelskis, yes.

So the 2nd richest club will finish 2nd. BFD. Ferguson is a largely spent force.

No, as far as I'm concerned, players get found-out and sometimes a coach can't do anything about that. No coach can stop opposition pitching the ball up to Andrew Strauss, catching chances off Marcus Trescothick, bowling accurately at Andrew Flintoff and Geraint Jones, or not preparing turning pitches for Ashley Giles.

I don't blame Duncan Fletcher for any of those.

So a coach has no say in the selection of his team? Fletcher's loyalty to his players was admirable, but it soon became a weakness when those players stopped delivering. His decision (& it obviously was his) to recall Jones & Giles for the 1st test in 06/07 beggared belief.

I don't solely blame Flecther for this, btw, I happen to think Graveney should go too.

 

[Richard]

You're beyond parody sometimes. If Fletcher had been in charge for 2 years his Ashes win would've looked like a massive fluke given our results since, so yes they would & possibly more so.

His Ashes win? Who cares about that? All I care about is the stuff since then - that which he's been, ridiculously, largely blamed for. Had he been a new coach in 2005\06, he'd not be gone now.

No it doesn't, because things don't always improve. Look at where Nottingham Forest are now...

And that can be blamed on Brian Clough? Honestly, for all you know, what's more, Forest could be winning the title again in 10 years time. What goes down can always come up[/b], and vice versa. No team's position is permanent in sport.

So the 2nd richest club will finish 2nd. BFD. Ferguson is a largely spent force.

Managers CANNOT be spent forces. To even come close to the Cheslkis, I repeat, is a huge achievement. To beat them, still a perfectly possible outcome, would be even more so.

So a coach has no say in the selection of his team? Fletcher's loyalty to his players was admirable, but it soon became a weakness when those players stopped delivering. His decision (& it obviously was his) to recall Jones & Giles for the 1st test in 06/07 beggared belief.

I don't solely blame Flecther for this, btw, I happen to think Graveney should go too.

And many selectorial decisions beggar belief. The decision to pick Tim Bresnan ahead of multiple better-qualified candidates was infinately worse than picking Giles and Jones for The 'Gabba. And yet because one is perceived (ridiculously) to have influenced an important series the lesser evil gets more attention.

If you expect selection to be perfect, you expect something you're never, ever going to come close to getting.

FFS, I'm not saying he was flawless, just that he has the right to some context. That decision made negligable impact on the series, but even if Mahmood, Read and Panesar had been picked (then we'd probably have done even worse) he'd still have been criticised, because people had simply decided it was time for change for change's sake.

 

[open365]

His time was up, but he still put a hell of a lot into English cricket and i hope he'll be remembered more for the positive things he did for England rather than dwell on the negatives.

 

[prakesh]

I actually feel sorry for Fletcher there.

I take it all back.


































































PSYCHE!