Peter Moores to be removed as England Coach when Strauss is appointed

Now being reported. Thank god

They're not the best of mates, apparently. KP as the new coach?

Hopefully this is part of the coordinated appointment of Jason Gillespie - who rejected the south Australia job last week

Olly wrote:Hopefully this is part of the coordinated appointment of Jason Gillespie - who rejected the south Australia job last week

Let's hope so. That would be great news!

They are dropping like flies today, Farage, Clegg, Miliband and now Moores!

Seems bl**dy odd to do it during a game!

Are they getting in a new coach or is Strauss' new public relations/whatever job would also involve acting as the head coach?

Ref Guildford's comment above :

Indeed it does.  Also probably not a very tidy way to make a change - having a decision leaked before the man that made it even takes up his position.

If it does happen I do hope England have assured themselves of a suitable replacement : there isn't a lot of time until the first NZ Test and the team has enough on its hands without being left manager less  on the eve of the match...although if you subscribe to the Warne
theory that the coach is a vehicle that gets you from hotel to ground perhaps it won't make much difference

alfie wrote:Ref Guildford's comment above :

Indeed it does.  Also probably not a very tidy way to make a change - having a decision leaked before the man that made it even takes up his position.

If it does happen I do hope England have assured themselves of a suitable replacement : there isn't a lot of time until the first NZ Test and the team has enough on its hands without being left manager less  on the eve of the match...although if you subscribe to the Warne
theory that the coach is a vehicle that gets you from hotel to ground perhaps it won't make much difference

'Not a very tidy way', Alfie? You could just have written the ECB way rather than going about all that clumsy stuff!.

I did consider that , msp. But I understand Strauss is supposed to change all that...

I subscribe to the Warne principle of a coach. A new analyst is a more important cog in the wheel really. Nonetheless, a little sorry for Moores. He can feel a little "mugged down leg" so to speak. Was given an absolute hospital pass with the ODI team, and the test team does have decent record under him.

msp83 wrote:Are they getting in a new coach or is Strauss' new public relations/whatever job would also involve acting as the head coach?

As far as I am aware its a non-coaching role. So if Moores was to go, the position would still exist and have to be filled

Strauss' is more of a corporate role than day to day running the team I believe

kingraf wrote:I subscribe to the Warne principle of a coach. A new analyst is a more important cog in the wheel really. Nonetheless, a little sorry for Moores. He can feel a little "mugged down leg" so to speak. Was given an absolute hospital pass with the ODI team, and the test team does have decent record under him.

I think a good coach/captain combination can make a huge difference. We have seen it with England before, Hussain/Fletcher partnership, then Strauss/Flower dragged effectively the same group of players out of the absolute dregs at those times. I don't follow other countries that closely, but would note a huge transformation in the Aussies since Lehmann took over.

I wouldn't say Moores has a decent Test record in this stint. A series loss at home to SL, and a draw with Windies caused by a feeble collapse to the likes of Jason Holder and Shannon Gabriel are unacceptable to England supporters. India were well beaten but put up very little resistance once England got momentum in that series.

I feel for Moores i do, but i think his strength lies with bringing on the youth, and devloping them, also he's done ok in county cricket, so he will be fine for work...

Personally i think Jason Gillespie will get the job, and he would be a good replacement IMO.

VTR wrote:

kingraf wrote:I subscribe to the Warne principle of a coach. A new analyst is a more important cog in the wheel really. Nonetheless, a little sorry for Moores. He can feel a little "mugged down leg" so to speak. Was given an absolute hospital pass with the ODI team, and the test team does have decent record under him.

I think a good coach/captain combination can make a huge difference. We have seen it with England before, Hussain/Fletcher partnership, then Strauss/Flower dragged effectively the same group of players out of the absolute dregs at those times. I don't follow other countries that closely, but would note a huge transformation in the Aussies since Lehmann took over.

I wouldn't say Moores has a decent Test record in this stint. A series loss at home to SL, and a draw with Windies caused by a feeble collapse to the likes of Jason Holder and Shannon Gabriel are unacceptable to England supporters. India were well beaten but put up very little resistance once England got momentum in that series.

Lehmann obviously had a impact, but it's worth remembering he's lost an Ashes already, and been whitewashed in Pakistan (yes it was a two-test series, but the the two wins were so emphatic, it could have been a six match series for little change). He got a little lucky in the 13/14 summer because they fell into the Mitch slipstream. In the first Test Australia were 130-6, before Mitch and Haddin saved them. In the second test, The game was poised, Aus at 270-5, and England dropped two sitters late in day one. Even in the third Test, Aus were 140-5 first innings. England's chronic inability to bowl a team out lost them the Ashes, because they really had three chances to take a driving seat, and floundered. You could put this to Lehmann instilling a fighting spirit or whatever, but England's troubles since then with the exact same problem suggest it's more England than it was Australia. Fletcher to be fair, sort falls in the middle because he was an elite technical analyst. As for Strauss-Flower, well I hope I don't sound like Gerry... But I was hardly impressed. India at home? Lanka at home? Pakistan at home? Fair enough won the Ashes, both ways. But got whitewashed by Pakistan, were a KP special away from defeat at Lanka. And lost 13/15 days in the series against us. The world cup was only slightly less embarrassing than the 2015 edition... Middling success to me.

Kingraf...the point with the Flower era is that it included the best run England have had in the professional era. It may not have been the dominance shown by the pre 2005 aussies or more recently the safrcicans but by england standards it was boggle worthy, especially if you include the T20 world cup..still their only ICC trophy ...and that they managed to get ranked number 1 in all formats very briefly. Sure the wheels came off pretty fast but it only returned England back to the sort of level they have been at for much of the period of time most of us have been watching them.

As for Lehman his record isnt flawleess, but then the team he inherited was pretty rank and is still short a few players for the test arena. Theres a distinct feeling hes managed to polish up a bit of a turd and get the best out of a "bunch of good blokes" which is what England have been attempting to do post KP...just very badly. Hes a logical choice to attempt to get players like Stokes to actually deliver, or maybe to get Broad to turn up more than once a series.
Things like a lack of a fast bowler , a left armer or a second opener a head coach cant fix overnight .... but they can get the best out of what is available and create an environment where the players who are there play their best cricket.
England coaches have failed to do that for some time now.

Australia are plenty good enough. No matter who they play always have three rampant seamers. At all times. Rogers-Warner is the most stable opening partnership in world cricket. Clarke-Smith represents the second best 4-5 in world cricket after Amla-de Villiers. Lyon is really as good as spinners are going to get nowadays. Chuck in Haddin, and you nine guys who are all probably able to get into any side. The T20 win is nice, but (and I promise I'm not saying this because we haven't won one) it's hardly a triumph of management. India won it with haphazard collection of guys who didn't feel like taking a break after the world cup. Pakistan aren't the model of coaching/administration triumph. West Indies players celebrated their win with these exact words, "the president's here? Marlon we getting paid!!", not exactly a coach reliant victory... Or organisational reliant. I wasn't impressed by Flower-Strauss, I'm not blind to their successes, but outside of maybe an equivalent of an away Ashes, Pakistans achievements aren't world's apart from theirs. Unconquerable at home, WT20 title, and a world cup semi final

Gooseberry hits the nail on the head for me. By England standards the Flower/Strauss era was untold riches. It may look modest from the outside, but England simply don't do dynasties of success in any sport. See also Clive Woodward and Alf Ramsey

Football and rugby are intrinsically different to cricket though. Especially football where the captaincy is nothing more than a "Best behaved award". A coach is a vital cog in a football team, and a rugby team.

Strauss-Flower success for me simply happened in a period where the English calender was a little kinder (Ashes win excepted), once things got real, the wheels fell, and fell quickly. It's the equivalent of, say Tottenham topping the league facing West Ham, Sunderland, Everton etc at White Hart Lane. I'm not unconvinced that England would have really struggled to get to #1 if Moores was kept on looking at their 2009-12 schedule.

Think you're being a bit uncharitable to Flower/Strauss , raf.

Easy to put qualifiers on the record of all but the absolute standout teams...nobody put that team up alongside West Indies/Australian dynasties of the late last century/early 00's : but they went from early 2009 to end of 2011 without losing a series ; and even if they weren't able to successfully refresh the team after Strauss left they still managed to win in India and defend the Ashes at home - before the wheels fell off. I call that a damn good run.
Your hint that Moores might have done the same is perhaps not without merit : he probably never had enough credit for cultivating several new or recycled players (Swann Prior Broad Anderson ) whose careers went on to , as it were , blossom under Flower... But whether he'd have had the success enjoyed by Flower we can never know. Some people think Moores is better in the development of young talent than actually putting the finishing touches to a team - but in fairness he hasn't really had the chance to prove that theory wrong or right.
This time around he has again introduced some new talent (not that he had much choice) and it will be interesting to see how this batch develops ;  but it seems it will once again be under a new head coach.

Just for the record , I did not expect Moores to have a long run in the role this time - and he wouldn't have been my choice ; but I think he has been treated a bit unfairly by critics both in the media and the Internet circus.  If anybody really thought he (or anyone) could take a team that had just been shredded 5-0 in Australia , stripped of all confidence , and lost half of their experienced playing strength virtually overnight ; and put it back in perfect working order in just twelve months : well I want some of what they're smoking...

A new coach at this time may well be the best move for England ( though whoever it is has a tough assignment to start with in NZ -Ashes followed by trips to SA and UAE) ; but if the team does fare better than expected it may owe as much to the dirty work Moores has had to do as the effect of a new broom.

I gather Gillespie is favourite ? But I saw a suggestion re Paul Collingwood - now that could be interesting...

I first remember watching cricket in the summer of 76, stood outside Rumbelows with my grandad watching Holding steaming in or Richards flicking the ball majestically to th eleg. since then england have only been a good team once and that was under Flower's stewardship. Of course he got lucky witrh having some quality players - but then so does any successful coach.

As to Moores. The whys and wherefores of his last go should really have precluded his selection - though decent candidates were not plentiful. He was though handed a real poisoned chalice. England were on the slide, with the game (especially ODIs) having changed around them. Whoever got the job was unlikely to be in ot for long as results (agsin especially ODI) were unlikely to improve while the required changes were being made.

It is not Moores fault that England collapsed in Barbados - that was the players. It is not really his fault that we have so few wicket takinmg bowlers - we just are not producing them.

However the team has by and large been playing "scared" cricket. We have been timid and then justified it by using stats. Moores is to blame there.

Thats very much my experience too LT. England my not have been great under flower, but its the best I can ever remember them being.
Moores may have been unlucky to pick england up twice when they were in a pickle but he just doenst seem to be the type of guy to bring what the need, a bit of back bone and confidence. The lack of left armers or super fast bowlers isnt his fault, but england have been successful without them in recent history. He hasnt done what he was employed to do which was create a positive and confident team who produce the cricket they are capable of on a regular basis. If anything many of the players have continued to slide.
Lehman inherited a team in every bit as sorry a state as England were post Ashes. Only two players in his squad for his first series averaged over 40 with the bat, and one of those had chromic back problems. the turn around in both team and individual performances has been pretty remarkable under his stewardship. Sure its partly down to the players, but a head coaches role really is to provide the environment that individuals need to excel and thats what he has done. Hes handled difficult characters like Warner and negotiated the capatincy issues. Smith was a leg spinner who could bat a bit when he took charge, now hes a firmly established as one of the most sccesful mid order bats out there. Lyon previously couldnt hold down his place, now hes recognised as a useful option. Johnson has had his most sustained run of form under Lehman and kept his head together, and fast bowler injures have dropped. Hes turned Rogers from a desperation pick into a useful if not spectacular test opener in an era where they are few and far between. You could argue all that is luck and right place at the right time but on paper it sure looks like hes done something right in polishing up what was a real turd...the group of players hes had to pick from isnt much different to what was available to Arthur.
Whether his style would have the same effect on English players is another question though, but you can see why they are turning to Aussies to bring a bit of backbone to England and get the players to lift their game.

This is now official. Have to feel for Moores, he rebuilt his reputation with Lancashire after his first stint with England and it's been tarnished again. Good domestic coach but poor international one.

Ultimately, he's just out of his depth.

Gooseberry wrote:Thats very much my experience too LT. England my not have been great under flower, but its the best I can ever remember them being.

England were pretty great under Flower before the tail end of his reign

Never go back, hey! Unless your a certain Chelsea manager.

Regardless of Moores' pluses and minuses, he deserved better treatment. An unpleasant stench surrounds the timing and handling of his dismisal. Given previous considerable concerns about the ECB's lack of PR skills, it just seems lessons cannot be learned. An inglorious commencement to Strauss' reign before he's even officially started.

As an aside, Pietersen's tiny chance of a recall to the England side becomes less than miniscule with Strauss' appointment. Currently being suggested along the Harleyford Road that even Pietersen will realise that and so may soon be off.

Think KP should try and earn as much as possible before his career winds down. Performing at the top ones again would have been great, but with Strauss in, there is no chance......
Perhaps he'll give me a reason to have a look at the IPL now and then.......

I think it is no massive surprise but as others have said the way it has been handled has been terrible. Leaking out in the press first days before the actual deed adding to the embarrassment for Moores. And to think the same body that fired him in this manner are the ones who will choose his replacement. Doesn't fill you with confidence does it?

--Eng attempt to change many times....the results don't show up.....in fact things just keep spiraling downwards.

--because the choices they make through their changes are "convenient" ...and not professionally the best choices.

The group of individuals that are cosy with each other....keep sticking together as the core of the team.

--Problem is a listless captain.......and for now not only has he been shielded by making Moores the scape-goat in a shabby excercise.
But also give a buddy in place who belongs to the "cosy club".

--The only other "cosy-arrangement" in international cricket was the Srini-Dhoni-and-Dhoni's CSK buddies...which as an aside has been dismantled.
atleast this arrangement had some wprld cup and T20 performances to show,

Will Eng beat NZ at home ?
Can they avoid being walloped when Aus visits them thereafter ?
they don't know how to play contemporary limited overs...so thay can't even show some consolations in that form?

--will they keep Cook if he loses to NZ?
Will they keep Strauss if he is walloped by Aus ?

Convenient changes give an appearance of something was done.....unfortunately rarely deliver results

Hate the way news appears to leak out in this way.  If anyone like Moores has to read about sacking their sacking in the media/social media before being told in person I hope they would get some financial compensation for the humiliation involved.

The ECB are past masters in the politics of leaks. They showed through the Moores KP situation and then during the KP saga as well....... Nothing surprising.........

Let's face it the ECB don't have a clue when it comes to PR, but ultimately this is the correct decision

Have to agree with several posters above : this was an appalling way to handle a (probably necessary) termination of a good man's employment. Doesn't make for a nice start to the Strauss reign - though I doubt he had anything to do with the leak.
Couple of issues : timing is awkward ; but once it was decided to make a change sooner rather than later , there was no "good" time - at least this is better than just before the Ashes Tests.
And they had better have someone properly lined up for the job ; if anything , the way this has been handled is likely to put off potential candidates...
At least those who suggested Strauss would be too cautious and unwilling to rock the boat have proof to the contrary now.

alfie wrote:Have to agree with several posters above : this was an appalling way to handle a (probably necessary) termination of a good man's employment. Doesn't make for a nice start to the Strauss reign - though I doubt he had anything to do with the leak.
Couple of issues : timing is awkward ; but once it was decided to make a change sooner rather than later , there was no "good" time - at least this is better than just before the Ashes Tests.
And they had better have someone properly lined up for the job ; if anything , the way this has been handled is likely to put off potential candidates...
At least those who suggested Strauss would be too cautious and unwilling to rock the boat have proof to the contrary now.

Not sure Moores' sacking proves Strauss is up for the radical way.......
This was a call waiting to happen following the WC debacle, and the way the side played in England, it was becoming increasingly difficult to continue with the same. New Zeland is on an upward swing In all formats and have a good bowling lineup, so a home redemption wouldn't be easy. So if they had to make a change, it had to be done now. And I think its more of a top management call to remove Moores, not so much of Strauss....... He might have been consulted, but I don't think the call was left to him.......

msp83 wrote:Think KP should try and earn as much as possible before his career winds down. Performing at the top ones again would have been great, but with Strauss in, there is no chance......
Perhaps he'll give me a reason to have a  look at the IPL now and then.......

there are many episodes left in this soap opera....
can they keep him out if Eng can't beat NZ at home....

meanwhile KP cracks a triple ton

Apparently, Strauss is set to meet Pietersen today to tell him he won't ever be picked for England.
KP has proved his point yet again, now Strauss can start with a terrible public relations disaster....... Must say well timed by KP.

I'm happy for Strauss being the new director of cricket, as long as he gets KP back. 

Think england should go for Mark Robinson at Sussex. I don't want an Aussie in charge.

msp83 wrote:Apparently, Strauss is set to meet Pietersen today to tell him he won't ever be picked for England.
KP has proved his point yet again, now Strauss can start with a terrible public relations disaster....... Must say well timed by KP.

Piers Morgan @piersmorgan
I can now reveal that Andrew Strauss and Tom Harrison asked to see KP tonight. I believe to tell him he wouldn't play for England again.

both KP and PM have great sense of timing on the field and off the field respectively

And as I said before the legend of KP will get bigger, the longer he sits out.

I am sure Eng would have won in WI had electrifying KP been in the team in place of menatlly wrecked Trott

NickisBHAFC wrote:I'm happy for Strauss being the new director of cricket, as long as he gets KP back

Who's he replacing? Root?

msp83 wrote:Apparently, Strauss is set to meet Pietersen today to tell him he won't ever be picked for England.
KP has proved his point yet again, now Strauss can start with a terrible public relations disaster....... Must say well timed by KP.

If cricket watchers / fans cannot realise that scoring a few runs on the best track in England against a second rate attack after a few low scores against other second rate attacks, won't have Johnson and Co quaking in their boots - then they know little about the game

Banbrotam - your comments are cheap, predictable and inaccurate. My post on the ''Surrey v Leics'' thread refers.

Regardless of views on Pietersen's personality and whether that makes him unsuitable for selection by England, his outstanding talent cannot be denied. I am certain that Johnson and Co would not attempt to do so.

As I suggested earlier, if Strauss is to make a difference let us hope it is a positive difference. A way of doing that would be to seek ways of reducing any damage wrought by Pietersen's personality to his own team whilst still utilising his clear abilities. A conversation with Alec Stewart might have been a good place to start; to the surprise of many including myself, Pietersen has never been any trouble at the Oval and, in fact, has only been an influence for good (there are various testimonies as to his work with the younger players).

Reports of Strauss saying Pietersen will never play again for England do seem dreadfully at variance with Graves' earlier conversations with the player and threaten to cause a bigger PR disaster than even Downton could have managed.

On the other hand, at least we now know that Strauss isnt just there as window dressing. HE's in charge!!

Mind you, all things equal, I reckon Carberry's knock probably is slightly more impressive, as was Hales' April.

kingraf wrote:On the other hand, at least we now know that Strauss isnt just there as window dressing. HE's in charge!!

If they could kill KP...he would be long dead...tjhey have been trying since aug 2012 and many have fallen on their own sword....
Strauss makes his second tenure very difficult...with every game he loses...there will calls to bring back "the legendary KP".......
and legends like Chanders and Tendulkar have shown they could play until 40....KP has 5 more years of test cricket left in him.

kingraf wrote:Mind you, all things equal, I reckon Carberry's knock probably is slightly more impressive, as was Hales' April.  

Carberry a proven international failure........making a big score ......doesn't compare with Eng's best batsman I have ever seen......making a big score in the prime of his career and on the threshold of making a comeback

Sounds like an excellent innings, but a bit of perspective is needed:

>It was his first FC century in nearly 2 years - mainly because he hasn't played much FC cricket in that time
>It was at home to the weakest team in the County game
>He now flies out to play 3 weeks of IPL, so the chance to build on this, score a bagful more runs and pretty much demand selection isn't there

Stauss out!

VTR wrote:Sounds like an excellent innings, but a bit of perspective is needed:

>It was his first FC century in nearly 2 years - mainly because he hasn't played much FC cricket in that time
>It was at home to the weakest team in the County game
>He now flies out to play 3 weeks of IPL, so the chance to build on this, score a bagful more runs and pretty much demand selection isn't there

VTR - I agree about perspective. My posts late last night and this morning on this and the ''Surrey v Leics'' and ''Cut Nose'' threads try to reflect that.

One or two quick comments on your post and beyond:

* Their Division Two standing and my own eyes satisfy me that Leics are not the strongest team in the County game. Whether they are the weakest ... well, the season will judge that. I would say though that McKay looks a good acquisition whilst Raine seems to have gained some pace since last year.

* In a Surrey batting line up of proven (Sangakkara undoubtedly, Davies possibly) and emerging (Roy, Burns, Ansari) batting talent, no one else went beyond 36.

* I don't have natural feelings of sympathy for Pietersen. It is therefore perhaps a mark of the ECB's PR incompetence that I now feel he's suffered the very raw end of things.

Anyone doubting his ability needs their head read. Yes it was Leics, but it was a triple ton and counting.

BUT

His past actions have provided the England set up with enough ammunition for them not to pick him. A decision I entirely agree with.

I think Simon Hughes couldn't have put my thoughts into words any better:

"It's too late, there's too much baggage. Pietersen was lucky to get another chance after the text messages to South African players behind Andrew Strauss's back.
"It's like being unfaithful to your wife - you might get away with it once but not twice. His book was his own infidelity, times 50. That compounded what he had already done.
"And look at the facts - in the last 10 Tests he played he averaged 34. His current Test average of 47 is the lowest it has been since 2006 so it's gradually been in decline.
"He's had injuries and I do think he was disengaged in the last Ashes too. He once had the 'X Factor', now he's got the 'I Factor'."

guildfordbat wrote:

VTR wrote:Sounds like an excellent innings, but a bit of perspective is needed:

>It was his first FC century in nearly 2 years - mainly because he hasn't played much FC cricket in that time
>It was at home to the weakest team in the County game
>He now flies out to play 3 weeks of IPL, so the chance to build on this, score a bagful more runs and pretty much demand selection isn't there

VTR - I agree about perspective. My posts late last night and this morning on this and the ''Surrey v Leics'' and ''Cut Nose'' threads try to reflect that.

One or two quick comments on your post and beyond:

* Their Division Two standing and my own eyes satisfy me that Leics are not the strongest team in the County game. Whether they are the weakest ... well, the season will judge that. I would say though that McKay looks a good acquisition whilst Raine seems to have gained some pace since last year.

* In a Surrey batting line up of proven (Sangakkara undoubtedly, Davies possibly) and emerging (Roy, Burns, Ansari) batting talent, no one else went beyond 36.

* I don't have natural feelings of sympathy for Pietersen. It is therefore perhaps a mark of the ECB's PR incompetence that I now feel he's suffered the very raw end of things.

All good points, and to score 10 times the next highest score, I wonder if that's some kind of record for a decent sized innings?

We all know KP is a talent, I think the return to the IPL is the big sticking point here. There's no chance now to make another hundred in the next game say. If he could have done that, he can claim to be one of the form players, with a proven pedigree, and that would scream England selection