Andy Flower

[greg]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Yes I think I do .
New generals - same troops.

Only new face will be Prior.

[darksideofthemoon]

If Vaughan has his say it will be Nixon.

[flanflinger]

I think I am record as saying that it is not the playing personnel that need to change. They have the talent and I believe we have some of the best young cricketers in the world at the moment.

What they need is to be given the tools to make the most of their talent. Moores has never played at the highest level, but Flower has, and has excelled at that level, he is therefore a very good addition to the management team.

Do feel for Matt Maynard though, but not surprised at all, I am sure he will have a key role in the future.

[flanflinger]

Big question though

One of Flower's roles will be to work with the keeper (according to CricInfo), so will he be pushing for his now former colleague James Foster.

He has seen him up close for a few years now, so you never know, he may be able to make a big case for Fozzie.. which most of us on here would be reasonably happy with.

[Teatime FatCat]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

I Do feel for Matt Maynard though, but not surprised at all, I am sure he will have a key role in the future.

Why? In my opinion the results don't match up to an improved level of coaching. He didn't seem to do anything to improve the batting side of things, particularly in the One Day area (where he has some expertise) - in fact even with this coaching help, the management were completely unable to raise the level of our ODI game to an even average standard in the world cup or, Australia apart (where we only just came good in time!), for the last year.

The continued picks of Mahmood, Joyce, Panesar and Bell when they were clearly not up to scratch, the non selection of Loye, the one-paced batting, the poor faith shown by Vaughan in Dalrymple and the 'alledged' poor relationship with the press are all bad signs when it's time to keep your job.

We were sh*t in the world cup, and management as well as the squad should pay the price.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

I think TTFCs right there FF, and in many respects you've said it yourself. If the players we've got are pretty much the best available our poor (very very very poor) performances must be to some degree down to the coaching staff.

And as our batting on the whole was dreadful in the world cup (and consistantly so) Maynard was always going to get the boot.

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

Do feel for Matt Maynard though, but not surprised at all,

When I say feel for him, I mean in the sense that he has not been relived of his job because of his performance, but because his boss changed!!

When I said I was not surprised, it was for exactly the reasons that you spelt out.

The problem is he has not lost his job because of the way he worked, but for who he worked for, so in that sense I do feel sorry for him.

[Teatime FatCat]

But the inference being that he would have lost his job anyway?

[darksideofthemoon]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

When I say feel for him, I mean in the sense that he has not been relived of his job because of his performance, but because his boss changed!!

When I said I was not surprised, it was for exactly the reasons that you spelt out.

The problem is he has not lost his job because of the way he worked, but for who he worked for, so in that sense I do feel sorry for him.

But he would never of got the job in the first place if it was not for Fletcher. I read that Maynard has not given up his dream of being coach of England so that could have been a bigger blow that the job went to someone else.

I think had Fletcher brought the right assistant coach in he might still have been around as an ODI specialist coach with the right strategy was needed and Maynard wasn't that. Fletcher was a batting coach so why would he need another batting coach? I think that was Fletcher's biggest mistake.

[Harmy's Army]

Given that England's batting has been technically woeful for some time, Andy Flower replacing Maynard can only be good news. It was our bowling rather than batting that won us the Ashes in 2005 and no batsman can hold his hand up claiming consitency since before that series started to the present day. I'm reminded of the incident Boycott related down under where the "England Captain" (presumably Flintoff) contacted him covertly (to do it openly would have incurred the wrath of Mr Fletcher) to try to set up a get together so he could pick Boycs' brain on his batting problems. Would that have happened had he felt Fletcher/Maynard competent enough to address the issues he was struggling with? I will not dwell on the England ODI batting record under the Fletcher/Maynard era - it's suffice to say it has been a shocker.

I am very optimistic of a marked improvement in consistency from the likes of Strauss, Vaughan, Bell, Collingwood, Flintoff etc (whoever gets selected on the batting front) under the new regime.

What price Kevin Shine next in line for the axe after the significant dip in performance of our pace attack post-Troy Cooley? Our bowling in Australia (Hoggard and Panesar excluded) was dismal. Harmison had a nightmare down under, Anderson, Mahmood and Plunkett have been nothing if not wayward since breaking into the test and ODI set-ups. Flintoff's bowling has hardly set the world alight since Cooley left - though his whole game, rather than singling out the bowling aspect of it, has gone down the pan. Added to which Stuart Broad must have been under severe pressure to change his bowling action for his father Chris to make such a vitriolic public condemnation of the coaching set-up. I wonder if the bean-counters at the ECB are now counting the cost of not offering Cooley a long-term contract?