The Ashes 2006/07: The Brisbane Test Thread - Day Three

[Mike]

Darren Gough reckons the absence of Troy Cooley is a major factor in Harmison's lack of confidence.

[Occasional Fan]

Gough may be right, but if he is then it's a huge indictment of Harmison. He's a professional, allegedly. Professionals lose their coaches, bosses and mentors in all professions and usually with little or no notice and little or no ability to affect the decision of the bloke who's leaving. They have to get on with it and make the most of things to ensure that they continue to succeed in their profession. If Harmison can't do it because Cooley has decided to move on, that's tough luck for Harmison and he needs to find a new job.

This one, to be honest, really does sound like a thin excuse for a man who has just frankly failed to deliver in the most important game of the series.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan

Professionals lose their coaches, bosses and mentors in all professions [...] They have to get on with it and make the most of things to ensure that they continue to succeed in their profession.

This is very rarely the case: some seasoned tennis players (like Agassi and Henman) have reached a stage in their lives where the coach can be pretty peripheral... and Jenner is very much at arm's length from Warne... but even this trio benefit from the right input at the right time... and many, many top golfers, tennis players and cricketers will assure you that getting the right coach for you is absolutely critical to success... and that the wrong coach, or no coach, can lead to a slump at best and the 'yips' at worst.

It's perhaps true that in a team-game like cricket the role of the bowling-coach can be less central: a great captain (Dermott Reeve, Mark Alleyne) can take on a lot of the non-technical aspects, dealing with each player as an individual, giving them the mixture of support and straight talking they need, ensuring that nothing the TEAM does builds pressure or cause problems. Hussain was able to do moderately well on this front (certainly better than Atherton and Stewart)... and Vaughan set the tone magnificently in his brief spell, making any limitations on Fletcher's part look irrelevent.

Sadly.. since Vaughan's departure... it's basically been up to Fletcher... and he seems to me to deal with the "mental" side of the game rather as the military were once reported to do it: promising loyalty, but demanding it's earnt. I've no doubt this works well for some players... but I'm not sure there's even the patience necessary to start working with those for whom the one-size-fits-all approach ain't right.

The appointment of a team psychologist is surely acknowledgement of a failing on this front... but I'm not sure this particular psychologist is the one for Harmison!

Typically.. Bob Cottam says "If you get the technical aspect right then the mental side will also be right".. whereas Fletcher's man Shine seems to think the same way as Fletcher... that the technical flaws might well be a result of lack of confidence.. as if everything would suddenly come right the moment Harmison got a few (inevitable) wickets under his belt.

[Occasional Fan]

Rachael, I accept your points completely, but only in the somewhat limited and cosseted world of professional sport. When I wrote my comments, I confess I was really thinking of the millions of people around the world who have real jobs. My point, really, is that, if I had tried to use the departure of any of my mentors over the years as an excuse for not being able to do my job for whatever period of time, I wouldn't have stayed in my job until I had reached the full stop at the end of my sentence.

Harmison's performance in this match hasn't just been below par: it's been rotten to the point of utter incompetence. Basically, he has got to prove me wrong in that admittedly harsh assessment if he doesn't want to be getting back to Europe before I do (I'm planning to stay in Australia until the end of the Perth match because I've paid for it: he's being paid to do it, isn't worth it and doesn't deserve to be given much more of a chance). Whatever the reason for the performance, only Harmison can fix it, and I still find Gough's attempted explanation to be a lame excuse in the broad sense in which I made my first post.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Mr Hutt

and someone really needs to put a sock in giles mouth

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/mai...4/scbrig24.xml

Im sure Ern will tell me dont believe everything you read now but.. this coming in the middle of a test match?? is quite absurd!!

No it's a fair point Mr Hutt, I also find it unbelievable.

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak 120021

Whats wrong with being honest and admitting that the whole side were suffering from nerves on the first morning of the Test and that impacted on some poor performances?

A lot is wrong Scott IMO with letting your opponents know just how soft bellied you are a team - with much of the match still to go.
The Aussies SHOULD have been sufferening from nerves more than England - after all they were the ones that had to win back the Ashes.
I would hope the England side would graft and graft and leave the deliveries alone what McGrath put there ball after ball, and then just maybe ????????
Ponting did not enforce the follow on for historical reasons, England should if they have any guts - want to reverse history, they can't win, but they can apply themselves.

Originally Posted by Scott=Wozniak

Socks, mouths? I could make a few suggestions.

Yes so could I - there is always an excuse for getting beat, but never for putting a team out like England have done, and in my case - it's not with afterthought.

[Occasional Fan]

I'm with Ern on this one. One thing to remember if you are being charged by a elephant with a headache: you stare at him and never, ever blink. And if you do blink, you don't then draw attention to the fact by saying so. If ever there was a case for barring players from talking to the press, this must be one. Let the captain do the talking, Ash: that's part of what he's paid for. You're not, and we can see why.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Ernest

I would hope the England side would graft and graft and leave the deliveries alone what McGrath put there ball afetr ball

Rather as Pietersen did, perhaps

ps. there is nothing at all wrong with admitting nerves... as every player gets nervous... often to an extent that mike trike the outside as almost debilitatingly... and the difference with the great players being their ability to show the opposition that they can perform despite nerves - or even the ability to thrive on them, to use them to get the best from oneself.

Hayden played a very nervous stroke early in his first innings... no foot-movement, throwing the bat at a very wide ball he should have got alone: the entire England team saw it and saw the nervousness... and it really wouldn't make one jot of difference whether he admitted the nerves or denied the nerves at a post-match interview!

I find the honesty appealing (and Giles singularly articulate and engaging): long live straight answers to straight questions!

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Rather as Pietersen did, perhaps

Good point addressed Here , this side has shown no application with bat or ball.

Originally Posted by rachael

I find the honesty appealing (and Giles singularly articulate and engaging): long live straight answers to straight questions!

OF had this right in a post above,IMO show fear to a barking dog, and chances are it will bight you, give it a kick, and it will go away.

Australia batted for 2 days, then came out and batted again without loss except for a run out, England have nothing to lose, but all to gain - I believe what I wrote Here it is possible, it's up to the players, the coaches can only do so much - point again being - England are in the lucky possition of having nothing to lose - if England are 130-1 at tea - doubts will grow in Ricky Pontings mind - this game should not be over as far as a draw goes.

The England players should be playing for their places, and that should be an incentive.

[Crunchy]

All i can say is what a nightmare for Flintoff (he'l probably have nightmares for years) how much has his captaincy affected the team?. Also A Fraser has made the point that Flintoff should of just bowled a heck of alot more, it was his only choice. What do people think?.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Crunchy

Also A Fraser has made the point that Flintoff should of just bowled a heck of alot more, it was his only choice. What do people think?.

**** no. Because he is our only choice! I don't want Flintoff bowling anymore overs tonight, if we lose Flintoff to injury, well, it'll get even worse than this.