Moores set to lose Pietersen battle
In 1981, shortly after he was recalled as England's captain, Mike Brearley received a letter which read: "Dear Brearley, there is an old Italian proverb which says that if you want to know that a fish is bad look at its head."
As we all know, Brearley dealt so well with English cricket's head that the national side went onto to record one of their most memorable Ashes triumphs.
It would be an exaggeration to say that the stand-off between Peter Moores and Kevin Petersen suggests that the head of English cricket is quite as bad as it was in the summer of 1981. In any case, that Ashes triumph was a misleading pointer to the future, as successive 5-0 defeats at the hands of the West Indies demonstrated.
The truly worrying thing about the current saga is that an issue that should have been dealt with internally by banging a few heads together has now assumed the proportions of a major crisis.
The only solution is likely to be the departure of Moores, with an announcement possible as early as Thursday.
This is essentially a management problem not a cricketing one. It indicates that for all the talk of how the modern English game is efficiently managed, it remains a cottage industry dressed up with some fashionable management frills.
There are no great strategic and fundamental issues between Moores and Pietersen. Very simply, we have an old-fashioned personality clash. To be fair to Pietersen, he did give hints of this, even before his appointment as captain, when he said he needed to talk to Moores to clear the air. Now it would seem the air is so polluted that the two men can hardly bear to be together.
Inevitably, stories of why they are not gelling that have emerged are a mixture of the trivial and the extraordinary. Among the trivial is one that centres on Moores asking players to practise immediately after a hard, tense victory over New Zealand. The request seems to have caused much resentment.
In the extraordinary category comes stories from well-informed sources who have told me of how Karen, Moores' wife, upset some staff at the England and Wales Cricket Board as well as some players by what has been described to me as a high and mighty attitude. She is also said to have told a player he was dropped before he had been officially informed. Pietersen, I am told, was aware of some the problems she had with ECB staff and told them to keep him informed.
Even if we discount such stories, the like of which often emerge when people who work in such close, almost claustrophobic groups fall out, the fact is that Moores and Pietersen were always likely to make a very odd, disjointed couple.
Moores is part of the growing number of good-to-average county pros who see coaching as a way of extending their cricketing life.
Like many of them, Moores is given to reading books that aim to teach management success. His recent reading has included Malcolm Gladwell's 'Outliers: The Story of Success'. He might have been better advised to read Gladwell's more famous 'The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference'.
While Moores has his friends among the players, he can be abrasive while his approach could be, some may say, from the Bob Woolmer school of coaching: full of statistics and extensive use of laptop computers. It does not appeal to all the players, certainly not one like Pietersen.
Pietersen has never lacked confidence in his own ability and never needed a laptop to reassure him. I was first made aware of this some years ago when he was in dispute with his first English county, Nottinghamshire. We met at his lawyer Naynesh Desai's offices in London. He had decided he did not want to play for his native country South Africa - he did not like their cricketing policies - and was determined to leave Notts, which he eventually did.
I was struck by his confidence but also his self-deprecating laugh when we discussed whether his off-spin would mean he could be an England all-rounder.
Since then, this confidence has burgeoned so that he now believes he can lead England to great cricketing heights. As we know, he also has the self-belief to invent new cricketing strokes, like the switchblade sweep. It is also this confidence that has made him all but publicly declare that he cannot work with the coach his employers have saddled him with.
The path Pietersen has chosen is certainly fraught with risk for him. England should beat the West Indies easily enough, but unless the triumph includes victory in the one-dayers that follow the Tests it will be a rather weakened Pietersen who will return home for the Ashes battle.
He may become a great batsman but not necessarily the great captain he would want to be.
For the ECB, this whole saga shows the danger of thinking neat management solutions work in cricket. Recall that in removing Duncan Fletcher after the 2007 World Cup the board overruled their then chairman David Morgan, who wanted Fletcher to carry on for a bit before casting round for a new coach. Instead, the decision was made to promote Moores immediately and the position was not even advertised.
The result has meant successive English captains having to adjust to a coach when in other countries, captains are involved in deciding who the coach should be.
It is worth remembering that a cricket coach is much, much less influential than a football manager while a cricket captain is much, much more important than a football captain.
Historically, successful teams like the Australians have got that balance right. This saga suggests English cricket has not.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~21~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
great blog mihir
i think that moores shoukd be fired as there are much better coaches around but someone needs to have a word with pieterson and tell him that he can't have everything he wants
Complain about this comment
How to stretch two bits of gossip into a long, boring, blog. Oh dear.
Complain about this comment
Why should Pietersen require ODI success? The last time I checked the Ashes were competed for over a series of test matches and one day cricket was a money-spinning irrelevance.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
'...it remains a cottage industry dressed up with some fashionable management frills.'
Beautifully summarised and I have nothing to add.
Complain about this comment
You make some good points Mr B, but let's be honest Moores is not the man to lead and inspire great players such as KP and Flintoff.
His own playing career was average at best as you point out, does he really have the knowledge of a man like Fletcher or the personality and flair of good old bumble?
I think not.
Moores give's the impression that he's superior to everyone else and is far too aloof for his own good.
Board should move him on and back KP fully after all who would you rather have at the helm for the Ashes Moores or KP?
Here's another thought how many cricket fans can name coaches of Australia, India, South Africa? Not many me thinks but I bet all and sundry could name captains of said sides! Which begs the question that you clearly answer who really runs the team?
Cheers.
Complain about this comment
In a way I'm lucky. I never wanted Moores as a coach, or Pietersen for captain. KP is at least well worth his place as a player. I've heard a number of stories about Moores,with regard to his previous relationships with other players. Mainly Vaughan and Colly. Niether of whom seem to have gone out of their way to express their support for Moores.Moores seems to spend far to much time with his lap top, for me. To take a lead from our footballing brothers ( not usually a good idea), the best English coach is'nt necessarily good enough for success in International Cricket. Let's either look abroad,or, if KP really wants MV, why not player coach.
Complain about this comment
Not that impressed really.
Guess this blog just shows that Mihir doesn't know any more than the tabloids writer who span the webs in the first place.
KP has confidence, Moores has a laptop.
Insightful stuff.
And as BackwardDefensive notes, I don't see why ODI's should serve as indication of success. Test cricket is more important and we'd gladly lose every ODI in history if it meant winning the big test series.
Complain about this comment
Pietersen may be Englands best batsman and most confident player but since when did England let their Captain or any other player dictate who the coach is? Just seems wrong.
On the other hand though you can't see Fletcher ever having let it come to this. He worked with some strong personalities in Hussain and Vaughan but (even when he lost the plot towards the end) he always seemed to be in charge.
England picked the wrong Coach. Then they picked the wrong Skipper. Someone like Moody working alongside Strauss would have much more cricketting understanding and judgement, both tactically and selection wise.
Complain about this comment
It is now time that Kevin Pietersen re-aligns his ego back down so it is alongside his IQ.
I have a real concern that he is starting to believe all the hype and now feels he is bigger than the game.
No-one should forget the team and the game are bigger and more important than any individual.
Perhaps Pietersen is using this as a means of diverting attention from his woefull record in India!!
Complain about this comment
While I don't believe that Moores is the right man for the job, I find distasteful the way that the captain can seemingly force him out.
Who would replace Moores? Graham Ford? He's already turned down India and New Zealand. I can't see him wanting to be second fiddle to KP. Ashley Giles? Little experience and too close to several of the players.
It wouldn't surprise me if KP tried to get Fletcher to return. He seems keen to reassemble the Ashes 2005 team as much as possible.
Complain about this comment
Another thing to consider is that Moores was promoted too early. As is pointed out Moores is one of the good/average ex-players who are now into coaching and after Fletcher they rushed into selecting someone who wasn't really ready for such a big job. E.g. with the New Zealand post test match practice Moores may have been over zealous with the idea of regular practice where as an experienced coach would have given the players a rest or instead of a practice would have held a review of the match or something along those lines.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"does he really have the knowledge of a man like Fletcher or the personality and flair of good old bumble?"
"Good old Bumble", fantastic as he is on Sky, took us to the very bottom of the Test match rankings, below Zimbabwe.
Complain about this comment
poor blog..i agree with 2-sparky, a tabloid style article focusing too much on irrelevant issues and not enough on cricket based reasoning. Surely a coaches wife and a training session immediately after a game are not reason enough to terminate a contract?? A very biased article toward KP...and by looking at the way its written...the sole reason is that you have met the man??? Pietersen has come in and caused problems...unable to get on with the coach and apparently Freddie..and he feels he already has the knowledge and experience to question a senior coach and deliver ultimatums to the ECB. Is this someone we want in charge...if Moores is sacked they will hire a Pietersen lapdog and he will have control.
a effective solution looks very difficult...whatever happens the team will be under more pressure than ever for a result and this is Pietersens fault. Moores has kept his issues with Pietersen internal...KP is flexing is muscles and will continue to do so until he gets his was. My solution...get rid of KP...he may one of our best players but cricket games aren't won by one man alone and with him still there we won't move forward as a team...just as a KPtatorship.
As for your comment 'beckfordisalegend'...even more ridiculous than the blog that precedes it...sacking moores on kp's say so will only fuel what is an already enlarged ego and will enforce that he CAN 'have everything he wants'
Putting the importance of retaining one player, albeit a good one, above the wellbeing of the national team....ludicrous
Complain about this comment
I know of no other sport where the coach could be dismissed by the captain.
Moores has been a very good and respected coach in county cricket and has done a good job for England. Pieterson come to this country because he couldn't get into the South African team and now think he runs the whole of English cricket, a good player but still for me one who takes too many risks to be a very great one.
If Moores is dismissed it will set a very dangerous precedent for the future.
Complain about this comment
KP needs putting in his place. He needs to get on with playing cricket and captaining the side placed in front of him - not worry about anything else that is not in his job description, no matter what Moores gets upto.
On a broader note I think we need an England "manager". A sole person to pick the side and captain and bring in a backroom team.
That way, the person running the show has total control and is directly accountable for results - like in football. There would be no pointing fingers at eachother.
Complain about this comment
"This is essentially a management problem not a cricketing one. It indicates that for all the talk of how the modern English game is efficiently managed, it remains a cottage industry dressed up with some fashionable management frills."
Do I really have to point out the irony in a BBC employee funded by the public purse making wisecracks about the inefficiencies within the management structure of English cricket?
Oh yes. It appears I do. Astonishing, Mihir. Absolutely astonishing, particular given the rather high-profile mistakes your employers have made (Brand and Ross and telephone competition scandals springing immediately to mind).
The Bob Woolmer school of coaching certainly employed laptops and technology but at the heart of it was a tremendous man who was very much into the individual. Saying he was pretty much a laptop coach is rather churlish and inaccurate.
Complain about this comment
I can't understand how a coach like Moores was put in place. I think there was a concerted attempt to avoid a coach who would assume the managerial style that Fletcher had become.
The appointment of a single captain in all formats has created a polarity of authority. I don't believe Moores has the weight of respect that Fletcher commanded; partly because as a cricketer he was mediocre AND he does not have the exotic quality that a foreign coach can cloak themselves in. He is on a hiding to nothing. Pietersen is a player with the respect of his peers on the world stage.
I think a charismatic coach is required or a re-structure, but knowledge of this situation should not be in the public domain as the article states.
Let's not give the Aussies a head start again- this has to be sorted soon.
Complain about this comment
whilst i agree Moores should go its also a dangerous precident to set. KP seems to be getting way too big for his boots to me, a great player there is no doubt but as a Captain the jury is very much out. KP needs to be wheeled in and reminded there is no i in team!! Englands poor test frm of late isn't just down to Moores - we have seen a number of changs in the coaching staff and i for one dont think Otis Gibson is upto scratch a bowling coach as we have been pretty woeful in that department wth the odd exception i.e. flintoff, broad. I amunsure as to how Vaughan not being selected is an issue as his form has been non exisitent and hd he been selected would completely send out the signal that Team England is a closed circle - one that many think is the case already anyway. The likes of Rob Key, Owis Shah but wonder what on earth they have to do to get a chance when our batting line up is so weak.
England have big big problems at he moment and as the old saying goes - it's going to get worse before it gets better :(
Complain about this comment
Looks like both captain and coach could go..
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/england/content/current/story/385533.html
Complain about this comment
There's not much here we don't already know from other sources - Mike Selvey, Simon Barnes, et cetera. Not forgetting Angus Fraser's ill considered rant, a very poor piece of journalism which did little other than show that Fraser appears to be jealous of KP.
KP is seriously driven, to an extent that many people would find frightening. I've seen this type of motivation in business people: when people appointed to work with them fall below the standard expected they are moved on. Or should be, depending on the organisation concerned.
KP feels that way about Moores. Stick a laptop in my hand and I'll get all the stats and video footage anyone could want. Coaching, especially at the top level, isn't about robotically quoting stats and platitudes to the media. And whatever Moores' plus points from his career as player and coach at Sussex, the perception I have is that of the stats quoting machine.
Who will do more for English test cricket over the next few years? If the ECB think KP will do more then he's the man who the ECB should back. But guardedly, making it clear that there will not be a repeat performance.
Complain about this comment
Moores will shortly be 'taking the positives' out of receiving his P45
Complain about this comment
The usual trite rubbish from Mr Bose. Regurgitating tittle-tattle and mixing it with some platitudes and a helping of the blindingly obvious.
Please BBC, this is NOT professional journalism. This kind of 'blog' derserves to be in the far reaches of the internet where like-minded people can indulge themselves in self-congratulation.
I can only assume that his aim is to undermine the entire establishment of english cricket with ill-founded comments and conjecture. That is not the job of the BBC.
Comments from knowledgeable insiders such as Aggers are fine - even when controversial - but Bose is a rank amateur and should be kept well away from the computer keyboard.
Complain about this comment
#20, your point about KP not being the finished article is exactly the reason KP wanted Vaughan in the side - he knew that his tactical ability wasn't that strong and didn't feel he was getting the advice he needed from Moores.
Therefore, KP's reasoning was I need a sage on the field & Vaughan is the most obvious choice for this role.
For me given his form, Vaughan's tactical ability is the reason why he should be appointed as coach by the ECB.
As a player he is past it, even though he won't admit it (or at least not til the end of the Ashes) so the best place to have his tactical ability is in the dressing room.
Complain about this comment
Decent article. I just wish Mr Bose would be a bit more positive about English cricket for once. I watch his reports on BBC news and read his other blogs and he always seems to put a negative spin on the state of English cricket. We're not doing that badly!
To respond to other comments there was no other option but to make KP captain. There were simply no other suitable candidates. KP still is head and shoulders above any would-be captain in the current side so if a change is to be made it would be Moores.
Complain about this comment
KP should not have been made captain.
He couldn't spell loyalty.
If he could, he would at the SCG.
I very much doubt that South Africa would be teetering on the brink of number 1,( are they already there?) if KP was their captain.
Moores may or may not be the right man to coach but this is not the way for him to go.
I would certainly want a man of KP's ability in my team but I wouldn't put him in charge of the oranges.
Complain about this comment
Let's put it succinctly:
1.) Duncan Fletcher was removed too quickly.
2.) A mess was made of the captaincy.
3.) Peter Moores was not an inspired choice.
The whole thing is the culmination of a series of bad decisions going back at least 2 years.
I know that it was hip to say "Fletcher must go" before, during and after the last Ashes series. In fact, people were calling for his head even when England were winning and winning big. Duncan Fletcher made a series of brave calls: some of them right, some of them wrong. He at least knew what he wanted and had a plan although, when the snipping reached its height, it was extremely hard for him to get anything done at all.
In fact, had England not collapsed horribly on the 5th morning of the 2nd Test - not Duncan Fletcher's fault at all - most likely the Ashes series would have ended 2-0 at worst. Once the side threw away a potentially match-winning positiion so quickly everyone knew that the game was up. If we had gone into that series with the right captain, we would probably still have lost the Ashes, but I know many people who believe that the result would have been more likely to be 2-1 than 5-0.
The fact that fan and press power allowed Duncan Fletcher to be brought down in the most humiliating way was always going to create a rod for our own backs: the present "Get rid of Moores" campaign looks awfully like the "Get rid of Fletcher" campaign. Let the pack taste blood once and they'll want it again and again. Soon no one will be able to keep the job unless he has a 100% winning record and even then some fans will go for him.
This brings us on to the second error. Here one assumes that Duncan Fletcher has to bear some responsability. England's Ashes fate in 2006/07 was more or less sealed once Andrew Flintoff was given the captaincy. Many people questioned the decision at the time. What happened was even worse than any of us imagined. Having Andrew Flintoff as captain in India in a restrictive atmosphere and in a crisis was a masterstroke. Having him as captain in the carefree atmosphere of Australia and the Carribean where social life and alcohol are far more abundant than in India was never going to be a great move. Is it any surprise that the side gave up with their coasch being hung in the media and the captain binge-drinking? Who the hell was in charge?
At the time and in hindsight Andrew Strauss was the better, safer choice. He might not have won the series, but he sure as hell would not have lost it 5-0. At worst England would have been competitative in defeat. Right now not too many people would back him as captain, but I'd be happier with Strauss at the helm than KP.
As for Peter Moores. Well, the fans got what they wanted. Post-Fletcher it was demanded that the coach should have his power and influence drastically reduced and that's what they got. Post-Fletcher the fans wanted someone nice and sensible with no strong personality, no pet theories and no risk of rocking the boat. That's what they got.
Peter Moores took over a ship that was drifting towards the rocks. Many fans had accused Admiral Fletcher of driving it there himself, rather than simply being a helpless witness of an almost unavoidable disaster with a ship fatally holed below the waterline(something that the Australians are going through in almost identical fashion right now without having any obvious answers either). We should not criticise Peter Moores for not stopping the eventual shipwreck, but we can ask why he has not refloated the ship.
Peter Moores has had some notable successes: the development of Stuart Broad and the appearance of Ryan Sidebottom have been huge pluses, but their development has come at the same time that Andrew Flintoff's injuries have been mismanaged and Mattherw Hoggard, Simon Jones, Steve Harmison, Liam Plunkett and Sajid Mahmood have been effectively lost.
Similarly, one of the great successes at the end of Duncan Fletcher's reign was the development of Alistair Cook and Monty Panesar and the feeling that Ian Bell had finally broken through. Two of the three may well not be in the Test side in the Carribean and the third is barely treading water (he scored 6 centuries in his first 17 Tests, but has added just one more in his last 19).
For all his faults, Duncan Fletcher had a clear plan and stuck to his guns. Right now:
- Is there a clear selection policy? It isn't obvious, even if there is one.
- Is there are clear plan for how to move forward? It appears not.
- Are young players coming thought and making telling contributions? Not really. Even Stuart Broad is making his main impact in Tests as a batsman, rather than as a bowler.
Frankly, I don't like the precedent either, but Peter Moores is living on borrowed time and doesn't look capable of turning it around. He would be wise to step down unless he has something really brilliant up his sleeve. However, I don't see KP as the ideal choice either and am not convinced that he should be captain in the coming summer.
Complain about this comment
By the way, the gentleman writing to Mike Brearley about "if you want to know a fish is bad, look at its head" was suggesting something similar to another fan who wrote that summer suggesting that England use a non-playing captain. Neither was being exactly complimentary to him as captain and (visible) head of English cricket.
Complain about this comment
"To respond to other comments there was no other option but to make KP captain. There were simply no other suitable candidates."
I agree, if you're saying that KP was made captain by default, not really because he was the outstanding candidate.
Strauss would have been the safe choice but was struggling for form at the time so couldn't be guaranteed his place. He at least has captaincy experience with Middlesex.
Collingwood was a non-starter as he'd just resigned the one-day captaincy. Flintoff had been tried and found to be useless. Cook was too inexperienced and none of the other players could be sure of their places.
The bold choice would have been Rob Key - a proven captain (England U19s, England Lions and Kent). He's already knocking on the door for a recall for his batting performances and, as a bonus, is probably the only English opener who isn't completely inept in limited overs cricket. It would be seen as gamble, and it might have back-fired, but it also might have worked spectacularly.
Complain about this comment
Well, PlasticGloryHunter, a report in tomorrow's press suggests that KP will be replaced with Andrew Strauss and that Peter Moores will be joining KP at the Job Centre.
Rob Key's problem is that despite plenty of opportunities and a 221 on his CV, his Test average is only just over 30 (31.0 to be exact) and his ODI form for England was non-existent when in the side. He may be a better player now, but an average of 31 from 15 Tests and the fact that over 40% of his runs came from just two innings - one of them not out - were not great recommendations. He's also had a chance as Lions captain without producing a convincing case for promotion: he was overlooked as an injury replacement both in India in 2006 and in Australia in 2006/07.
Complain about this comment
That's a good assessment by Mr. Bose, and fair too. Such a shame that it is spoilt by "comes stories from well-informed sources who have told me".
Complain about this comment
Anyone claiming that Moores has a good record should remember that he has never won a series against good quality opposition, and came perilously close to losing against New Zealand when England's batting disintegrated. Moores has failed to develop new players, and the old ones have regressed. Also, given that Moores failed to get on with Vaughn and has now got into a fight with KP, I'd suggest he might have some personality problems rather than the captain.
Complain about this comment
Well, KP has resigned. The only question is whether Peter Moores will join him now, or later.
Complain about this comment
And I see that Peter Moores has resigned too.
Well, at least we start in the Carribean with a clean slate. Anyone want the job?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I see that my first attempt was removed because it was potentially defamatory - I shall endeavour to salvage it.
My fundamental point was that this somewhat misses the story. It is clearly cobbled from the publicly available evidence at the time - it assumes that Pietersen will be able to maintain his position. Very shortly afterwards it emerged that Pietersen was at risk of losing his position, and the following morning he had resigned.
For the self-styled 'inside line of sports', I felt that the stories of Moores' wife, the news of which sports-psychology book Moores was reading, was all a trifle trivial.
These are all things that the author is happy to tell us come from his sources and personal encounters, and in an attempt to understand the story better they are unequivocally red herrings.
Complain about this comment
Mihir...you were wrong in your prediction, but hey it can happen. What is now pretty galling though is to hear you on 5 Live talking as if you knew what was going on all the time - giving us the 'inside line on sport.' The BBC has been outwitted on this story today by a nimbler, harder-nosed news organisation ( no names).
Complain about this comment
It seems this is a classic case of a giant ego with delusions of grandeur refusing to admit mistakes... i.e I agree with post 39
Complain about this comment
So as things have reached a conclusion, it has been pretty obvious throughout the whole saga that Mihir is reporting on gossip, hearsay and speculation, and the supposed 'inside line on sport' reveals no more than your average blogger debating transfer rumours on the football page.
The whole saga has been completely driven by press who actually know nothing but claim to have the inside line, and oddly enough the irresponsible reporting based on nothing has actually impacted on the events as they have unrolled. There's a pretty neat analysis of the whole sorry saga here:
http://sportwithoutspin.com/cricket090107pietersenmoores.htm
Will the media learn anything? Probably not.
Complain about this comment
"England should beat the West Indies easily enough."
Really? This was the same arrogant approach England took when they went to Antigua for the Stanford 20/20 match. Granted, England are rated higher in Test cricket, but for God's sake, show some respect to your opposition!
The West Indies may just give England a tougher fight than they expect....
Complain about this comment
frankly this article is rubbish and i think that peter moores is a quality bloke i have had the pleasure of meeting him and his intrests are focused on making a future of cricketers. Kevin peitersen is a arrogant person who needs to be put in his place, he isnt liked and moores got the ultimate backing. and as for this whole laptop stuff get off your soapboxes i woul dlike to see you all do a better job and in the long run i think the ecb have made the wrong desicion. Mihir i think you were completly out of line bringing his wife into it, if you want a story try not to sccop so low to make up pathetic false information such as that to get people to read it. im disgusted quite frankly in this article.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS