Was It Pressure That Got To England?

[hawkeye]

Is it all the problems surrounding english cricket that are affecting the team performance or is it that the players just aren't that good?

Taken by itself, Englands crushing defeat at the hands of The Netherlands in the T20 WC would be just one of those upsets that sport throws up from time to time. Coming as it has, however, at the end of a period of woeful performances, it has to be seen as further manifestation of the deep-rooted malaise that has taken hold of English cricket.

The descent has been sudden and shocking. A 3-0 win during the English summer was quickly followed by a 0-5 loss in Australia in back-to-back Ashes series. The One Day Internationals were then lost 1-4; Australia won all three T20 games; and then came below par performances in ODIs and T20 outings in the West Indies.

Piled on top of the shoddy cricket they have played are the controversies that have recently rocked English cricket: The Jonathan Trott mystery illness that caused his departure from Australia, Graeme Swanns mid-series retirement, Kevin Pietersens enforced departure from international cricket, and the perceived missteps the English cricket authorities have made in handling the many problems that have come their way some of them invited.

England Fold Under Pressure

 

[Skater]

These things work in cycles. We just need to give a new coach the time to quietly do his thing and we'll see England in the top 3 again.

 

[SWITCHHIT]

Blame the players not the staffs.....they are not gonna play on the field,the players should take responsibility

 

[Champagnepapi]

Nope. It was England playing their typical tactics.

 

[PokerAce]

I think England rely too much on a coach. In Football sure the Manager is the key, but in cricket the coach is just an advisor. They rely on the coach too heavily for tactics, and strategy and then blame it all on the coach. To actually say that the coach was not good enough or his tactics were not enough, is totally wrong. Simply because if tactically England were found wanting then its because of the Captain not the coach. England want to play cricket too much like Football, and are over reliant on the coach. They have to recognise that the coach is secondary. Over relying on the coach leads to players especially the captain losing spontanaenity on the pitch, where the decisions are required to be taken on the spot. There is no consultaion with the coach.

All great teams in cricket have great captains, who are tactically very aware and have good decision making. In cricket you remember the great captains and there has hardly ever been a great cricket coach. In the dominant WI teams we remember Llyod as the captain, Pakistan had the great Imran Khan a super Captain, Australia had Waugh, Ponting, both good tactically, India have MSD, who is not great in tests, but in limited overs, is a captain very strategically sound and on the spot with bowling changes and stuff, similarly Fleming was a great captain and did a fantastic job with a side of limited ability. How many coaches are there who come even close to these legends. Coaches in cricket are like Asst Managers in Football, they are good only if the person they are advising (captain in cricket) is capable of taking their advice and then stamping his own style of implementation on it.

In cricket it is always the captain who comes first and then the coach. England however rely too much on coaches and the captains of late have become so reliant on the coach that one could even say they are hiding behind the coach, and not realising that they are the ones who have to come up with the plan and the coach will help them do it and not the other way around.

England do fine in tests where there are breaks in play every 2 hrs and they can consult the coach and formalise new tactics. In limited overs though once the plan formulate doesn't work there is little room to discuss things with the coach, You go back in only when the innings is done and dusted and the captain has to then adapt to a new gameplan on his own. However so reliant have they become on coaches that England captains can't do that anymore. They need a coach to give them ideas. This is the biggest problem. England need to have a captain in limited overs who is spontaneous with strategy and good with on the spot thinking and capable of coming up with new ideas on his own.

Over reliance on the coach is hurting England and their captains seem unable to adapt to new changing situations in the middle. England I think is the only team who rely on coaches so much. Remember it is the Captain who must first step up then coach can only help him, but in the middle, it is the captain who has to adapt to a new strategy when the pre decided one is not working and make that one magical bowling change, or make that one unconventional field change to once again affect the game. The coach cannot do that for him, and this where England's over reliance on the coach hurts them in limited overs.

 

[SWITCHHIT]

My eyes started paining while reading your post..So long...

 

[PokerAce]

My eyes started paining while reading your post..So long...