The 13 Reasons why……….

……..England are no 1 in the world.

History

For various reasons – the legacy of the Empire; the Commonwealth; EU laws – England have a larger pool of talent to select from than ever before. Some – mainly embittered Australians, South Africans and Indians – argue that this has devalued England’s success, but it is surely positive that the England team reflects the multi-cultural, mobile society which it represents. Perhaps the South African influence is disproportionately stronger than the Asian influence, but time will no doubt change that. Besides, those that complain about the ‘united nations’ nature of the current England team would do well to consider the alternative: a system where players from different cultures are alienated and excluded.

Weak playing age and the failure of others

It may seem churlish, but a strong case could be made to suggest we are in a relatively weak playing age. World cricket has few, if any, of the ferocious fast bowlers that dominated in the 70s and 80s, the era of the great spinners has just about come to an end and several teams – Pakistan, West Indies and Zimbabwe – have been beset with in-fighting that undermines the talent they continue to produce.

Even India, a side blessed with immense batting ability, seems to be suffering from a lack of fitness and for prioritising limited-overs cricket, while Australia are reeling from the loss of several great players within a short space of time (Shane Warne, Glenn McGrath et al.) and some muddled selections. South Africa, meanwhile, have been hindered – in the short-term, anyway – by their quota system.

It leaves England as one of the few teams that is no longer guilty of self-harm. They are, perhaps, the only team that have given themselves the best chance of succeeding.

Lord MacLaurin:

Much in the Raising the Standard (August 1997) document that MacLaurin produced as a blueprint for the future of the English game was naïve. For example, it rejected two division cricket and instead backed the three conference system and a 14-game Championship. It also suggested that amateur, club cricketers would play for England.

But MacLaurin understood one thing very clearly: the viability of the game in England and Wales was utterly dependent upon the success of the England team. However obvious that seems now, it wasn’t at the time.

The single act of refocusing all efforts on the betterment of the England side led to everything that followed. It led to an on-going argument with the counties, to the introduction of central contracts, two divisions, higher salaries, better training and coaches and countless other improvements. It might just have been the key episode in the resurgence of English cricket

Chris Smith:

Not an obvious choice, perhaps, but Smith, the Labour Government’s cultural secretary from 1997-2001, made an important contribution. For it was Smith, at the behest of MacLaurin, who made the decision to remove cricket from the ‘A List’ of events that could only be shown on terrestrial (as it was then) television.

This remains a controversial decision. Critics point out – quite reasonably – that the decision to allow SKY to buy exclusive rights has denied some children of the opportunity to watch any live cricket. In the long-term, therefore, there is a concern that it could jeopardise the number of future cricket lovers.

The fact is, however, that the decision enabled the ECB to sell TV rights for vastly increased sums. Indeed, their turnover almost quadrupled. That afforded the possibility of central contracts, specialist coaches, the improvements at Loughborough and countless other advances. Even since the Ashes success of 2005, the England budget has more then doubled from £11m to over £25m

Whatever the long-term effects – and they remain debatable – it is doubtful that England would be No. 1 now unless Smith had been persuaded to allow free-market bidding for cricket’s TV rights.

Peter Moores:

A glance at the stats will suggest that Moores’ reign as England coach (April 07-January 09) was not a success. England were defeated at home by India – their first home series defeat for six years – before going on to lose to Sri Lanka (away) and South Africa (home) and then, finally, in India again.  However, Moores planted seeds that blossomed under Flower. It was, after all, Moores that recalled Graeme Swann and James Anderson. Moores also brought in Matt Prior, Andy Flower and Richard Halsall, who were to play a huge part in the more professional and better prepared England teams that subsequently emerged. Peter Moores is quietly emerging as one of the unsung heroes of English cricket.

Four-day cricket:

Although the advent of four-day cricket far preceded any improvement in the England team (it was first trialled from 1988-1992 and, from 1993 all Championship matches have been scheduled over four days), it took tome for the effects to filter down into every aspect of the game.

It led to tougher cricket, played on better pitches. It led to bowlers learning how to take wickets on flat surfaces and batsmen learning to build innings over time. And it led to players learning to fight to draw games. In short, it helped bridged the gap between the domestic and international game.

It’s a point that might send some warnings to England as they look to the future: changes made to the domestic game now could come back to haunt English cricket in a decade or more. Therefore the ECB should think very carefully before tinkering any more with the Championship.

Two-division cricket:

The advent of two-division cricket in 2000 changed the complexion of the Championship. In the early days of promotion and relegation, three sides were promoted  – and relegated – each season, so almost every game had meaning.

That was a huge culture change. Before that, the Championship was awash with ‘dead’ games, leading to a surfeit of soft cricket. Sides often lacked motivation and the cricket sometimes lacked intensity. The introduction of two divisions helped English cricket develop a tougher core.

Central contracts and continuity of selection

In the Ashes drubbing of 1989, England used 29 players. In 1993, they used 24. In 20-11 they used only 13 and that’s despite an injury to Stuart Broad.

In the past, England squandered their most talented cricketers. They destroyed their self confidence, wore them out and instilled such a fear of failure that many were reduced to nervous wrecks. Few would argue this is the most talented XI England team they’ve seen. Is Cook more talented than Hick; Bresnan more talented than Caddick? Might Ramprakash not, with better management, have scored as many Test runs as Bell?

Now, however, England are maximising the ability of most of their players. Much of that is due to central contracts which have allowed the likes of James Anderson to rest and arrive for international matches in peak condition.

It’s not just about rest and practise, either. It’s about sticking with players during the inevitable dips of form they will experience – remember Alastair Cook ahead of the Ashes of 2010-11 – and instilling a culture of ‘team England.’ As Graeme Swann point out in the last issue of SPIN: “We are much more together now. Back then [before central contracts and continuity of selection] there was quite an insular, selfish feel to the team. There were cliques. It wasn’t 11 guys playing for one another. It was six or seven guys playing that way and four or five playing for themselves.”

Youth teams, the Academy and Lions:

Age group teams and Lions tours have been common for a few years, but the development process has become far more sophisticated and co-ordinated in recent years. These days, the development of the best players is monitored from the time they are in their early teens and the progression from U19s, in particular, through the Academy and onto the Lions and the England side is smooth and predictable.

Not only does this allow the management to not just monitor and assess the best developing players, but it enables them to instil the desired skills, disciplines and culture.

Just as importantly, this helps the players feel comfortable in the environment. When he first made it into the England team – in T20 cricket in 2007 – Jonathan Trott admits to feeling uncomfortable. He knew few of his team-mates and he didn’t know what was expected of him.

By the time he reappeared, in 2009, he had spent more time within the England environment, knew most of his colleagues in the dressing room and he already knew to expect of them and what was expected of him.

Attention to detail and specialist coaching:

The days when England simply selected the best side and trusted to luck are long gone. The planning and preparation extends far beyond the obvious, too. So while the likes of Graham Gooch (batting), David Saker (bowling) Richard Halsall (fielding), Brue French (wicketkeeping) deserve huge credit for their work, there’s a team of unsung analysts, bio-mechanists and other experts who have provided excellent service.

Consider, for example, the work of analyst Nathan Leamon. He’s a maths graduate from Cambridge University who works at the National Cricket Performance Centre at Loughborough. This summer he provided England’s bowlers with a series of colour-coded pitch maps split into 20 sections which detailed how each Indian batsmen would deal with deliveries pitched in each area. It’s typical of the attention to detail which Andy Flower has developed from reading the book Moneyball – Michael Lewis’s book on the importance of learning from statistics in Baseball.

From the tests that showed that Alastair Cook sweated least of all England players (a fact which persuaded the team to use him as ‘ball holder’ when trying to gain reverse swing) to utilising Dukes balls from 2009 (as they swing more), England are now squeezing every ounce of ability from their team. With four England batsmen rated in the top 10 of the Test rankings and five England bowlers in the top 11, it appears to be working.

Hurt:

1999 was, arguably, the lowest moment in the history of English cricket. Humiliated at the World Cup they hosted – England were eliminated even before the tournament’s theme song was released – the Test team were then booed by their own supporters when they lost to New Zealand at The Oval and plummeted to ninth in the Test rankings.

But humiliation and revenge are powerful motivational devices. Years of losses – not least the embarrassing Ashes whitewash of 2006-07 – had filled the whole of English cricket with a ravenous hunger for success. Not only were the players fully motivated, the ECB were happy to fund the central contracts, the support staff, the longer tour and increased number of warm-up matches, the modern coaching devices and training camps that have all contributed to this success. English cricket, stung by years of hurt, has been overhauled in recent years and is much the better for it.

This success has been a long time coming.

The Indian Cricket League, Stanford et al.

The ‘rebel’ ICL is destined to be a footnote in cricketing history. But it is significant, nevertheless. While Lalit Modi denies it (he may well take credit for inventing the sun, the moon and stars), the ICL was the forerunner of the IPL. It showed what a T20 league could be and created a template for the IPL.

It was also relevant because, without the threat of ‘rebel’ cricket, the ICC would never have implemented the widespread use of No Objection Certificates (no player can participate in any cricket these days without their national board granting such a certificate), which would have left the ECB powerless to prevent players going to the IPL – or anywhere else.

The Stanford event may also be relevant. It appears history will not remember this chapter kindly but, had it not happened, it is possible that the power brokers in India would have felt able to steamroller their own interests in the knowledge that no-one had any other options. While the Stanford event ended in tears, it did, at least, provide leverage to use against the BCCI. Without it, the IPL – and the BCCI – would be even more powerful than they are now.

Fortune:

Some at the ECB may pretend that the appointment of the two Andys was a masterstroke. It’s not so. Actually, Flower and Strauss were thrust together when every other option had been exhausted. England had, remember, tried Andrew Flintoff and Kevin Pietersen as captain before Strauss. And they had appointed Peter Moores before Flower. Only when KP and Moores were sacked and England were left with no time and no options was Flower appointed as an interim. The truth is, the ECB stumbled upon the right combination.

England’s split leadership: 3 formats, 3 captains

England’s new leadership team

In an unprecedented move, the ECB today announced that England will have 3 captains – one for each format.

Following Andrew Strauss’s not unexpected announcement to relinquish the ODI captaincy, Alastair Cook was today named as the new captain.    Strauss also announced his retirement from international limited overs cricket, something that he wasn’t expected to do because of the impact on his central contract.  Historically, players are just “not selected” rather than retire.

In addition to this, Paul Collingwood has been effectively sacked as England T20 captain to be replaced by fast bowler Stuart Broad – a move that has raised some eyebrows but was necessary because of the question marks over Cook’s abilities in T20 cricket and Collingwood’s injury concerns and poor recent form.

Cook is far from proven as a 50 over opener and indeed wasn’t even in the recent England one day squad although did make a good impression during his captaincy stint in last year’s winter tour of Bangladesh.  Cook said “I have worked hard on my limited overs cricket in recent times, I’ve never seen myself as a test batsman exclusively and I know I have a lot to offer both strategically and as a top order batsmen in one-day cricket”

Strauss said “retiring from One-day cricket will enable me to focus solely on the test captaincy and our on-going development in the Test arena as we strive to be to the top ranked team in World cricket.”

“There is still a long way to go for us in One day cricket and this is the perfect opportunity for someone new to take up the challenge.  I look forward to working closely with both Alastair and Stuart.  They are both proven world class cricketers and have outstanding leadership qualities”.

ECB Managing Director, Hugh Morris paid tribute to both Andrew Strauss and Paul Collingwood and reiterated that Strauss will continue to play an important strategic role in the development of Team England and a crucial role in developing and mentoring both Cook and Broad.   Broad in particular is a totally inexperienced captain admitting during the press conference that he hasn’t captained a cricket team since school and there are only a handful of scheduled international T20 matches before the 2013 T20 World Cup.   When asked how he will cope with the captaincy having had so little experience he said “every time I step on the cricket pitch I try to think like a captain, think about fielding placements and I have had the benefit of the experience and knowledge of 2 great captains, Andrew Strauss and Michael Vaughan, both of whom have taught me a lot”.

Team director Andy Flower said he did try and persuade Strauss to stay on for another year or so but that Strauss had been fully involved in the discussions about his replacement and the future direction. As Strauss put it “the end of a World Cup is a watershed for all teams not just England and an opportunity to refresh and rejuvenate and plan for the next one.”  It is clear that there is very much a 4 year plan in place to take us to the next World Cup in 2015.

Alastair Cook wasn’t the only candidate for the role though.  Demonstrating how businesslike and professional the England set up is these days, Andy Flower admitted  that a number of candidates went through a rigorous interview process by a selection panel for the role although he wouldn’t divulge who these candidates were or who was on the selection panel.

The decision to have 3 different captains is unprecedented but Flower is, as always, willing to try new things  “this has never been tried before…..we do not know 100% that it will work as an efficient and effective system but we are going to give it a try and it is an exciting opportunity for us to work closely together as a leadership team sharing ideas which will benefit us across all 3 formats. “

Much has been said in recent weeks about overcrowded schedules and although Flower was clear that this decision is not as a direct result of schedule or workload issues he suggested that having “might be the most effective use of our resources”    Flower also talked about how workloads mean that they need to think more smartly about squad rotation.

Paul Collingwood is said to be “very upset” at the decision to remove him as captain and although Flower said he is very much still involved as a player,  if the focus is all on planning for the T20 World cup in 2013 and the World Cup in 2015, it is doubtful whether we will ever see Paul Collingwood in an England shirt again.

When asked whether it’s now a “straight shoot-out” between Broad and Cook who takes over the test captaincy, Flower naturally denied this was the case but they are clearly both being developed for future leadership and Cook may turn out not to be the natural first choice even though he is clearly the front-runner, it may be that there are some question marks about his test captaincy potential and this arrangement leaves the door open for Stuart Broad and possibly even others.  Andrew Strauss is adamant that although you can never predict the future it is his intention to still be captain for both the Ashes series in 2013 and 2014.

The move to 3 captains is not without its logic but isn’t proving to be universally popular with some claiming that it makes England look directionless and chaotic and raising questions about how it will actually work in practice.  One thing is clear though, if any man in world cricket can make an arrangement like this work it will be Andy Flower who will manage Team England like a well run business with his 3 captains running each of their departments with leadership and support from their Chief Executive.

This is the sort of arrangement that happens all the time in the real world and works very well. Individual players are perfectly capable of working out who their captain is on the field and strategic decisions are taken as part of a management team.    It remains to be seen whether in practice it actually works.

Cook leads the way for England

Alastair Cook 10/10
766 runs at 127.66

A magnificent series. By the end of last summer, Cook was clinging on to his place in the England side and, by his own admission, “couldn’t hit a beach ball.” He averaged just 26 in previous Ashes encounters and his troubles outside the off-stump had the Australian bowlers salivating in anticipation. His career appeared to be in the balance.

It’s not any more. Cook batted for more than 36 hours in the series – no Englishman has ever spent longer at the crease in a Test series – and scored an eye-watering 766 runs. Only Wally Hammond and Don Bradman have scored more in an Ashes series. He fully deserved his man of the series award.

How did he do it? He left the ball outside the off stump and waited for the bowlers to stray into his areas. Then he cut, pulled and flicked to his heart’s content. And, as his confidence grew, he even unveiled a surprisingly elegant cover drives. Aged just 26, he’s already scored over 5,000 Test runs and recorded 16 Test centuries: he’s going to break every English Test batting record in existence.

Credit, too, for the selectors who stuck with him and the coaches who worked with him. Their judgement and faith has been fully vindicated.

Andrew Strauss 8/10
307 runs at 43.85

A sound, if unspectacular, series with the bat. Bouncing back from his first over dismissal at Brisbane, he settled England’s nerves with their first century of the series in the second innings. He passed 50 three more times in the series, often helping his side steal the initiative, but failing to go on.

His greatest contribution, however, remains the captaincy. While he’s somewhat conservative on the pitch, his admirable calm head ans sensible disposition helped England regroup after a shaky start at Brisbane and the debacle of Perth. He’s now one of just three man (Hutton and Brearley are the others) to have led England to Ashes success home and away. There’s little reason to think he can’t go further and lead England to World Cup success and the top of the Test rankings.

Jonathan Trott 9/10
445 runs at 89

You have to go back a long, long time to find a better England No. 3 than Trott. His sound technique, calm head and relentless hunger for runs have created a wonderfully consistent Test batsman who is equally proficient coming in at 0-1 or 200-1. And he seems to love batting against Australia: before his duck in Sydney he averaged more than 100 in the Ashes. Don’t forget that run-out of Katich at Adelaide, either. Trott was superb and has now answered every question about his technique and temperament.

Kevin Pietersen 7/10
360 runs at 60
1 wicket at 16

A somewhat perplexing series. Magnificent at Adelaide – he scored a match-winning double-century and took a crucial wicket – he only passed 50 once more in the series. For a player with as much talent as Pietersen, that’s slightly disappointing. Some of his off-field comments – such as the swipe at Peter Moores – hardly helped team unity, either. Even if there was more than a grain of truth in them.

Paul Collingwood 3.5/10
82 runs at 13.83
2 wickets at 36.50

He took several wonderful catches and a couple of useful wickets but, from a personal perspective, this was a bitterly disappointing series from Collingwood. He rarely looked comfortable at the crease and, while all his colleagues flourished, often looked as if he were struggling to cope with the pace of the Australian bowlers. His retirement was inevitable. It was the right decision, too. For all his determination and all his positive contributions behind the scenes, it’s runs that define a batsman’s worth and Collingwood simply hasn’t scored enough.

Ian Bell 8/10
329 runs at 65.80

If there were still doubters before this series, they are surely silenced now. No-one on either side timed the ball as sweetly as Bell and his century at Sydney, an innings that ensured his side of a series win, was the coming of age of a man who has promised much for a long time. Batting at least one place too low, he was often obliged to sacrifice his wicket in the search for quick runs and the feeling persists that, with more opportunity, Bell might have gained many of the plaudits that have gone to Cook. It is surely telling that, in the first innings at Brisbane and Perth, with all his colleagues struggling, Bell top scored. The next few years promise much.

Matt Prior 7/10
252 runs at 50.40
23 catches

A much improved ‘keeper, Prior was very good against the fast bowlers and, the odd indiscretion apart, reliable against the spinners. His six catches in an innings at Melbourne equalled an Ashes record and he finished with an admirable 23 victims. With the bat, he improved after a shaky start (he was part of Siddle’s hat-trick in Brisbane) and scored a maiden Ashes century at Sydney. To underline the selfless nature of his play, it was the fastest Ashes century by an Englishman since Ian Botham in 1981.

Stuart Broad 3/10
0 runs at 0
2 wickets at 80.50

A bitterly disappointing series. A muscle tear forced Broad out of the series after the second Test, by which time he’d claimed just two wickets and suffered a first ball dismissal. He had bowled somewhat better than the figures suggested, however, conceding just 2.3 runs an over and ensuring his captain a measure of control in the field. The pitch at Perth would surely have suited him ideally bit, with Tremlett, Finn and Bresnan now all pressing for inclusion, Broad can no longer consider himself an automatic selection.

Graeme Swann 6/10
88 runs at 22
15 wickets at 39.80

It was presumed before the series that if England were to win, Swann would need to enjoy a big series. It didn’t turn out that way. Swann failed to find much help from the Australian pitches and found Hussey one of the toughest opponents of his Test career to date. Swann didn’t always look comfortable against Australia’s quick bowling, either. Still, when conditions suited, at Adelaide, he played his part with a five-wicket haul that helped his side to victory, while his excellent bowling at Melbourne went largely unrewarded. He remained cheerful on and off the pitch, too, and certainly contributed to the relaxed and happy mood in the England camp.

Chris Tremlett 9/10
19 runs at 6.33
17 wickets at 23.35

A breakthrough series. Seemingly in the cricketing wilderness just 12-months ago, Tremlett build on his excellent season in county cricket with a performance that announced him as one of the most fearsome fast bowlers in world cricket. Casting off his reputation as injury prone and small hearted, Tremlett bowled with pace, bounce, hostility and skill. In such form, he is as fearsome as fast bowler as any in the world.

Tim Bresnan 8/10
39 runs at 19.50
11 wickets at 19.54

Called into the side for the final two Tests, Bresnan responded with two highly impressive performances. Maintaining an excellent, nagging line and length, Bresnan gained movement in the air and off the pitch and generated surprising pace. While the highlight may have been the superb spell in Melbourne that accounted for Ponting, Hussey and Watson within 18 balls at the cost of just two runs, his batting at Sydney will also have reminded the selectors of his all-round ability.

James Anderson 9/10
22 runs at 4.40
26 wickets at 26.04

The series that established Anderson’s reputation as one of England’s finest post-war bowlers. Answering all the questions, Anderson swung the new ball conventionally, reversed the old ball, gained movement off the seam and, throughout, maintained excellent control and a wonderfully probing line and length. There are very few better fast bowlers in world cricket.

Steve Finn 7/10
3 runs at 3
14 wickets at 33.14

Started the series well, with six wickets in an innings at Brisbane and a brave performance in Adelaide. But he seemed to tire in Perth and paid the price for conceding more than four an over by losing his place for the final two Tests. It was a brave decision from the selectors, however, as, at the time, Finn was England’s leading wicket-taker in the series. Aged only 21, Finn remains one for the future.

Why England won the Ashes

Crushing margin of victory speaks volumes

Tremlett answers critics as England take control

England exorcise demons with emphatic win

Andrew Strauss: ‘We’d be mad to be satisfied by Ashes win’

Andrew Strauss puts the Ashes win in perspective in his interview in the special 2009 Review issue of SPIN, which is in shops from Friday November 27.

SPIN: You’re very feet-on-the-ground about the Ashes win, aren’t you?  There’s no triumphalism – you feel it was the start of something rather than the end-goal…

Andrew Strauss: It has to be. Look at our world ranking and look where Australia are. Anyone who thinks that we’ve achieved our life goal would be… mad. Quite frankly.

But it is the life goal of every English cricketer to win the Ashes…

Well, it is, but…

So it would be a reasonable reaction to think ‘job done’…

Exactly. It’s so important to our country: the history, the tradition, the rivalry. But in pure cricketing terms at the moment, there are bigger challenges for us. We may not have the same euphoria if we win in South Africa, but it’s a bigger challenge. I personally think it’s sad that the England team has never been the No 1 team in the world for any extended period of time, certainly in one- day cricket. And we’re going to be taking as many steps as we can to make sure we get somewhere near that.

To England fans, the 6-1 NatWest Series defeat to Australia after the Ashes may have looked similar to the 5-0 thrashing your side took against Sri Lanka in 2006. Has there been any progress at all? Did the two series feel any different to you?

Well, some of the traits were similar. At that time [2006] we had a pretty good Test side but we were experimenting with one-day players: Tim Bresnan and a couple of other players came in for that Sri Lanka series probably when they weren’t quite ready. This time, we are maybe a bit more settled as a side. But when you’re losing like that it makes you reassess what you’re doing as a side. Myself and Andy Flower have a number of areas that we feel we have to improve upon if we want to compete with some of these teams away from home as well as at home in the future. And the Australian defeat was really a catalyst for us to start putting some of those plans into action…

Writing in SPIN, Eoin Morgan said that defeat gave England a new carefree, nothing-to-lose  approach to their batting. He used the phrase ‘hell-for-leather’…

Well, there’s a number of things we’re looking to do, some of which we haven’t spoken to the players about yet, actually. But that attacking intent is a good one, away from home in particular. To live with the likes of India and some of these teams you have to play that way. But at the same time, you can’t use that as a crutch: ‘I got out but at least I played my shots’. We need to be more consistent as a batting unit, so we need to improve our skills. If we want to be more attacking and more consistent, our skills need to improve a lot. 

Andrew Strauss’ book, Testing Times – In Pursuit of the Ashes’ is published by Hodder and is in shops now. This is an extract from an interview in the Christmas issue of SPIN, also featuring Stuart Broad, Michael Vaughan, Garry Sobers, Viv Richards and the debut of Andy Caddick as our hard-hitting star columnist – as well as our now-traditional Top 50 countdown of the year.

Free 2009 Cricketers Who’s Who when you subscribe to Spin this month!

Yup – you get a free copy of the Who’s Who – worth £18.99 RRP – when you subscribe to SPIN right now.

The Cricketers Who’s Who is celebrating its 30th year of publication and features full profiles of every player likely to play first-class cricket in England in 2009.

As well as stats and career details, the 750-page tome also features player’s off-field opinions on the game as well as things like their favourite bands (generally this is Snow Patrol, though one player, oddly, chooses 80s MORists Mike and the Mechanics.)

So Chris Silverwood is a karate black belt; Liam Plunkett’s favourite band is (still) “r’n'b”; Rob Key called his daughter Aaliyah and, as a youth, played tennis for Kent; Stuart Broad played hockey for the county as a teenager and always bowls three warm-up balls before he begins a spell…

We could go on.

Suffice to say it’s full of hard fact and soft trivia and is pretty much indispensable – particularly if you’re getting it for free.

This year, it also features an intro by England skipper Andrew Strauss (4 A-levels, BA Hons (Economics), favourite band not listed but known to be friends with Keane.)

Subscribe to the next 10 issues of Spin for £30 and you get the magazine before it’s in the shops, make a massive saving on our £3.75 cover price AND get a free Who’s Who worth £18.99.

It’s obvious!

Andy Flower confirmed as England coach

Andy Flower will oversee England’s attempt to win back the Ashes, after the ECB confirmed his appointment as coach this afternoon.

Flower, who has been assistant coach since May 2007, takes the top job three months after the sacking of previous coach Peter Moores.

It is Flower’s first head coach role. “We have every belief that Andy has the potential to become a world-class coach,” said England MD Hugh Morris, in response  to questions about Flower’s lack of experience. “We believe we have the right man to do the best job for England.

“I am delighted that Andy has accepted the role.

“I had the privilege of seeing Andy work with the England team during the recent Caribbean tour and he impressed not only me but also the players, the backroom staff, management and the ECB officials who were out there.

“He is a man of great cricketing pedigree as well as a man of unquestionable integrity. He will provide the outstanding leadership that England require as we embark on this most exciting and challenging of years.”

Morris said that the ECB had received 30 applicants for the job, but would not confirm how many of them had been interviewed. 

Of his coaching philosophy, Flower, who is 40, said: “I think I’m honest and fairly open; I’d like to see an ethos of constant improvement in our side. As for any details on our strategy moving forward, I’ve obviously only just taken on the role, so those will have to wait.

“The relationship with the captain is very important. I respect Andrew Strauss. I think he’s a very good cricketer and a very good captain – so we’re starting on the right note.”

Having played 63 Tests for Zimbabwe, the last in 2002, Flower became assistant coach to then-England boss Peter Moores in 2007. He had already spent two winters working as a specialist batting coach with the ECB Academy. 

Under Moores, England lost their six-year unbeaten home record and lost four Test series out of seven. Flower took over as, effectively, a caretaker head coach for the recent West Indies series, after the January sacking of Moores. The 1-0 defeat in the Caribbean continued England’s poor run, though Flower and new skipper Andrew Strauss struck up a good working relationship that the ECB have decided offers the best way forward for the team. 

Cynics will say that the ECB’s hand has been forced: the head-hunting agency appointed to find the new coach has found the leading lights of world cricket less than keen to get involved with the England job. John Buchanan, Tom Moody and Graham Ford all opted out of the race while South Africa coach Mickey Arthur was apparently approached only belatedly, after he had signed a new contract with South Africa.

Flower, once ranked the world’s No 1 batsman, is highly rated as a specialist batting coach. Though he has never been head coach of a club or national team, he also brings the advantages of his recent experience as a top-flight player as well as his background with Zimbabwe, where an under-rated team punched above their weight to produce some outstanding results, after achieving Test status in the early 1990s.

Next Page »