Gower predicts Moores sacking

[The Large One]

Gower predicts Moores departure

Former captain David Gower believes Peter Moores could be dismissed as England coach before his side fly to the West Indies on 21 January. Moores and captain Kevin Pietersen have had difficulty working together and poor results since Moores was appointed in April 2007 are not helping.

"I would not stake a huge sum of money (on Moores leading England to the West Indies)," Gower told BBC Radio 5 Live. "It's a bit of a mess but I've got a feeling Pietersen will get his way."

England have a four-Test and five one-day international series in the Caribbean, starting on 4 February. Moores has declined to comment on the issue but BBC Sport understands he will sit down with Pietersen and England and Wales Cricket Board managing director Hugh Morris this week to discuss the problems.

"Hugh Morris has an interesting task on his hands to mediate and if he can't then he's got not much time to start the process of working out who is going to coach England," Gower stated on 5 Live's Sportsweek programme. I think the ECB are going to have to go with their captain because their captain is a mightily important figure in what happens this year and over the next few years. He is a fantastic player and has got the chance to be a good captain - he's still learning that trade and is far from being a great captain yet - and I think they are going to have to back their captain."

Pietersen has said the tension between him and coach Moores must be sorted out quickly and he told the News of the World: "This situation is not healthy. We have to make sure it is settled as soon as possible and certainly before we fly to the West Indies. Everybody has to have the same aims."

Gower added: "When Pietersen was appointed captain he asked Moores to stay in the background and organise nets while he got on the with the job of organising the team. If there is a character clash in terms of personalities, Pietersen is the bigger one and it's not the sort of situation where compromise is going to work. You can't have factions and you can't have divisions. It looks to me as though something has to happen and something will happen pretty soon."

Former England captain Graham Gooch feels the time Pietersen and Australia legend Shane Warne spent together at Hampshire might have had a negative effect on the South African-born batsman.

"Pietersen has had problems in teams before," Gooch told 5 Live. "He left Notts under a little bit of a cloud after a falling out in the dressing room. Unfortunately I think he has been influenced a little bit by Shane Warne at Hampshire. Warne was a great motivator as a player but, as one of the all time icons of the game and after leading the Rajisthan Royals to the IPL title last year, he doesn't really believe in coaching. He had his own run-ins with John Buchanan, the former Australia coach, and similarly maybe Pietersen doesn't like the style of Peter Moores' coaching."

Mick Newell, director of cricket at Nottinghamshire where Pietersen started his county career, says the England captain's strong personality caused problems while he was there.

"Kevin was a young man, bursting with talent and couldn't quite relate to people who weren't always as good as him. That caused quite a lot of friction in our dressing room. There were a number of issues over the four years that he was with us," Newell told 5 Live. And Newell is in no doubt who will come out on top if it comes down to a choice between Pietersen and Moores.

"I think there's only one winner if it goes to that extent and that will be the captain in this case which is a dangerous precedent to start setting. I think if Kevin really wants a change of coach then I suppose that's inevitable. If anybody is going to win it will be him."

Australian legend Glenn McGrath added on Sportsweek: "You need the coach and captain working together and then you have a real strong team. I look at the Australian team of the past and the captain said who he wanted in the team but that was backed up and supported by the coach as well and they did work together - and that's the important part."

Pietersen was appointed England captain last August following Michael Vaughan's resignation. Before accepting the role, he made a special trip to Loughborough for a private meeting with Moores, with a view to establishing what each man's precise roles would be. But the pair have failed to gel and after a honeymoon period in which they won the final Test against South Africa and the one-day series 4-0, England flopped in the Stanford Super Series in Antigua before losing the one-dayers and Tests in India.




I agree with Mick Newell, sacking the coach because he can't get on with the captain sets a very dangerous precedent, especially with such a (talented) prima-donna as Pietersen. Hopefully, they'll sort it out.

 

[Gritt23]

I was very surprised - and worried - when I read that article this morning, as I was thinking the selectors backing Moores was a no-brainer.

You can't have the captain dictating who the manager is, and nor can you have him exerting the pressure through the media. If they don't get on, they must sort it out behind closed doors. Bleating off to the media just smacks of a childish tantrum from KP.

Also, the bit about him wanting Vaughan back for Windies could have onkly beenfor one of 2 poor reasons,

i) wanted his old mate back in the squad / team. or
ii) wanted an ally in his battle with Moores.

Vaughan hasn't had an opportunity to show he has any form back yet, so it can't be for any other reason for me. It wouldn't have done Vaughan much good either. Just ask Gerraint Jones what it's like getting a recall before your batting is ready.

 

[Uncle Buck]

However we have carried on going backwards under Moores.

 

[Silent Bob]

Vaughan to replace him as coach?

 

[sten_super]

Moores has done nothing to earn the backing of the ECB. Pietersen is our best batsman by some distance. Surely that makes it a no-brainer?

I thought that the news of the problems was broken by an EBC 'source'? I'm pretty sure it wasn't Pietersen bleating to the media.

Interestingly, Gritt23, Moores is not the manager. He is the coach. They have a selection panel which pick a squad, and a tour manager who supposedly does all the arranging and administration. It seems that the job of England coach is to arrange nets, organise tactics and have a hand (alongside the captain) in picking the final XI.

Not to harp on in defence of Pietersen, but I also believe that he probably wants some more leadership in the dressing room, which was why he pushed for the inclusion of Vaughan. It's obvious Pietersen struggled a bit with the pressure in India.

Clearly there are issues between the men, and it would be best if they can sort them out. However, if they can't, then I'm sure that Moores would be the man to make way, rather than Pietersen.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I understand that Pietersen feels he needs Vaughan's nous in the side, but Vaughan hasn't scored many runs in the last couple of seasons and most coaches would see that as enough to rule out selection.

I can see both sides of this, but am more sympathetic to Moores. I'm sure Vaughan would not expected a recall unless either he'd scored a bucketful of runs and/or one of the top 5 batsmen had had a shocking year.

I'm sure Cook and Bell in particular must be concerned at Pietersen's apparent desire to recall Vaughan. Bell was the only player to underperform in the victorious Ashes team of 2005, so given his questionable mindset the last thing he needs is to be low on confidence now.

Surely with Strauss, Collingwood and Flintoff alongside him captaincy should not be suc a big issue as to cause a bust-up? I'd like to know what else KP and Moores have clashed over.

 

[Jim D]

If the 3 'selectors' are KP, the coach and the tour manager then it would be in KPs interest to get a 'yes man' coach so that he could always pick the team he wanted. That's good as long as his judgement is good, but gets dangerous if he keeps picking teams full of his mates with no regard to their form or ability. Still, Sussex should see lots of Luke Wright though.

 

[Gritt23]

Sten, surely the point has to be that the captain does NOT dictate the senior appointments around him, and his batting ability shouldn't come into that. What do we say next time, when say Strauss is captain and wants a change, "Well, perhaps if you can claw your average up nearer 50 than 40. tell you what, back to back 100s and we'll make the change you've asked for."

 

[sten_super]

Sten, surely the point has to be that the captain does NOT dictate the senior appointments around him, and his batting ability shouldn't come into that. What do we say next time, when say Strauss is captain and wants a change, "Well, perhaps if you can claw your average up nearer 50 than 40. tell you what, back to back 100s and we'll make the change you've asked for."

I don't know. I'd argue that the role of an international cricket captain (certainly within the ECB set-up, I'm not sure about other countries) puts the captain and the coach much more on a par than say in football, where one is appointed by the other. If you have no clear chain of command between the two, and at least one combustable personality (Pietersen), then you are bound to run into problems.

I'd hope that their differences aren't insurmountable. However, if they are, then there's going to become a situation where one of the two of them has to go. If it comes to it, who would you like that to be? My answer would be Pietersen. IMO, he brings far more to the England team than Moores. That was what I was getting at, although I agree that in an ideal world that shouldn't be necessary.

 

[The Large One]

I don't know. I'd argue that the role of an international cricket captain (certainly within the ECB set-up, I'm not sure about other countries) puts the captain and the coach much more on a par than say in football, where one is appointed by the other. If you have no clear chain of command between the two, and at least one combustable personality (Pietersen), then you are bound to run into problems.

I'd hope that their differences aren't insurmountable. However, if they are, then there's going to become a situation where one of the two of them has to go. If it comes to it, who would you like that to be? My answer would be Pietersen. IMO, he brings far more to the England team than Moores. That was what I was getting at, although I agree that in an ideal world that shouldn't be necessary.

But you then run the dangerous precedent of the captain dictating terms over the appointment and role of the more senior person.

For all Pietersen's talent, he nor any captain should ever be indispensable.

 

[Perry Milkins]

But you then run the dangerous precedent of the captain dictating terms over the appointment and role of the more senior person.

For all Pietersen's talent, he nor any captain should ever be indispensable.

Spot-on.

If Moores goes because KP has had a tantrum then what next? England to play in the cColours of the Proteas?

 

[Gritt23]

They are certainly closer than in football, but I think the hierachy is still that Moores is senior. Moores would play a part in deciding on KPs successor, but I doubt KP would have much of a say in Moores.

As for the second part. If this means one has to go as coach or captain, then I simply believe the ECB cannot oust Moores because the captain has complained about him. Whether the information is in the media directly from KP or not, I'm not believing he had nothing to do with it being out there, and that is simply NOT the way to behave.

As much as I love the player, and the guy comes across very well, I'm an all-round fan of his. But this isn't how I want the England captain behaving. he must get on with all sorts of personalities in that job, and if one of his failings is he can't deal with a variety of people, then he does not make a good captain, and will alienate players along the way, players that perhaps we need.

IMHO, you must side with Moores on this, and ironically, if that's how the ECB see it, KP may just have given Moores longer in the job, because he's not done well, but they may be reluctant to dismiss him now simply because it will smack of pandering to KP.

 

[The Large One]

Plus you have the issue of Kevin Pietersen wanting to do the exact opposite of what someone like Fabio Cappello's would do. i.e. pick a player on reputation and history, and not necessarily on current form.

And look at the relative directions of the England cricket team and England football team as a result of that method.

 

[Perry Milkins]

Plus you have the issue of Kevin Pietersen wanting to do the exact opposite of what someone like Fabio Cappello's would do. i.e. pick a player on reputation and history, and not necessarily on current form.

And look at the relative directions of the England cricket team and England football team as a result of that method.

If anything the debate should have been about why on earth Owais Shah gets overlooked instead of a has-been who has not demonstrated to anyone that he is still capable of scoring runs.

 

[Gritt23]

Or Robert Key. He's looked like the obvious move at No.3 for a while now.

 

[sten_super]

They are certainly closer than in football, but I think the hierachy is still that Moores is senior. Moores would play a part in deciding on KPs successor, but I doubt KP would have much of a say in Moores.

As for the second part. If this means one has to go as coach or captain, then I simply believe the ECB cannot oust Moores because the captain has complained about him. Whether the information is in the media directly from KP or not, I'm not believing he had nothing to do with it being out there, and that is simply NOT the way to behave.

As much as I love the player, and the guy comes across very well, I'm an all-round fan of his. But this isn't how I want the England captain behaving. he must get on with all sorts of personalities in that job, and if one of his failings is he can't deal with a variety of people, then he does not make a good captain, and will alienate players along the way, players that perhaps we need.

IMHO, you must side with Moores on this, and ironically, if that's how the ECB see it, KP may just have given Moores longer in the job, because he's not done well, but they may be reluctant to dismiss him now simply because it will smack of pandering to KP.

I think you make a lot of valid points. IF Pietersen is the one that cannot get on with Moores, and I think you are probably right that that is what has happened, then the ECB have to stand by Moores. I suppose I had imagined more of a two-way disagreement, which on reflection is not very likely!

Saying that, I'm not sure that the ECB will do what they should. They may view this as an opportune moment to get rid of an under-achieving coach. We shall see.

 

[Perry Milkins]

I think you make a lot of valid points. IF Pietersen is the one that cannot get on with Moores, and I think you are probably right that that is what has happened, then the ECB have to stand by Moores. I suppose I had imagined more of a two-way disagreement, which on reflection is not very likely!

Saying that, I'm not sure that the ECB will do what they should. They may view this as an opportune moment to get rid of an under-achieving coach. We shall see.

and replace him with?

 

[sten_super]

and replace him with?

Graham Ford at Kent would be the best choice, for me. Other options mentioned on cricinfo are Ashley Giles and Tom Moody (they also mention Andy Flower and Michael Vaughan, but I can't see it).

 

[Gritt23]

Graham Ford at Kent would be the best choice, for me. Other options mentioned on cricinfo are Ashley Giles and Tom Moody (they also mention Andy Flower and Michael Vaughan, but I can't see it).

Trouble with Graham Ford is that he's the name KP has put forward, .... do that and the ECB may as well drop their trousers and bend over the nearest desk everytime KP walks by.

If we sudden;y don't think Moores is the man, are we saying he wasn't responsible for the amazing turnaround at Sussex? If so, then let's give it another year and watch what happens at Surrey very closely, because if it wasn't Moores, then it was Adams.

 

[sten_super]

Trouble with Graham Ford is that he's the name KP has put forward, .... do that and the ECB may as well drop their trousers and bend over the nearest desk everytime KP walks by.

If we sudden;y don't think Moores is the man, are we saying he wasn't responsible for the amazing turnaround at Sussex? If so, then let's give it another year and watch what happens at Surrey very closely, because if it wasn't Moores, then it was Adams.

And I suspect that is why (according to cricinfo) he's not on the ECB shortlist. However there are men out there.

I think I'm fighting something of a losing battle here, on a board full of Sussex fans! But you and I both know that just because a man does a great job in one place, at one time, doesn't mean that he's going to be successful everywhere he goes. If Mickey gets us relegated, it doesn't lessen what he achieved the first time he was here. McClaren did a pretty good job with Middlesbrough, and was shite with England. I'm not saying that Moores is as bad as McClaren, or anything like that. But there are various reasons that clubs (cricket, football, whatever) do well at a given time, one of which is the coach. Moores did a great job at Sussex, but so far has been far from inspiring in charge of England. If it was down to me, he would get at the very least the Windies series, and (barring a complete catastrophe) the Ashes as well. After that, if things still look bad (or even worse) then his time may be up. However I hope that within that time he'll get us playing the way he wants, and will show himself to be a good international coach.