Brendon McCullum is the new England coach!

Good, bad, or a gamble?

The worst-kept secret in English cricket was confirmed this afternoon with Brendon McCullum named as the England red ball coach. I’ve got rather polarising thoughts with this appointment, and I thought it might be interesting to get those thoughts down on paper and write a Substack about it.

* Thanks so much to everyone who has bought me a coffee. It is much appreciated! *

First of all, I’ll be clear - I don’t know McCullum personally. But he seems like a coach I’d be pretty keen to work with - it appears we have a similar philosophy, he has a big focus on positive cricket, showing bravery and intent and I’m fully on board with his renowned quote ‘if you can’t change a man, change the man’.

So I kind of like the appointment for that reason, and he’ll be something different to what I think most people were expecting as a coach when Chris Silverwood left his position several months ago. It does seem likely that he’ll shake things up and do it his way, which is something I admire. Those are big positives for me. Now onto some question marks, and negatives.

A lot of these appointments are ‘jobs for the boys’. Does this one fit into that description? I’m genuinely not sure. He’s not the ‘old school tie’ type of appointment, but he’s obviously very close with Eoin Morgan and it doesn’t take a huge amount of imagination to consider that probably helped. He’s also worked with England’s analyst for some time, again which possibly helped. So it’s a question I can’t really answer other than - possibly.

Is he qualified for the job? I’m not convinced. To the best of my knowledge he’s never been a red ball coach, which I’m not sure aligns with the required job description on the advert for the post. Is he a good T20 coach? The jury is still out. Shreyas Iyer’s comments this week bring question marks to the impact (or lack of impact) that McCullum has had this season at KKR. A least some of the time in T20 leagues, it’s tough to attribute credit or blame to coaches.

Furthermore, I think it’s pretty unlikely that he has an in-depth knowledge of the player pool from which he has to pick his teams from. Yes, there will be a head selector but who will that be? They are going to have to be exceptional at their job - and I’m not sure there’s anyone in the current hierarchy who can make that bold claim with any reasonable justification.

Also - the amount of actual technical coaching that a T20 coach can impart on their players is pretty limited, with players only around for a few weeks to several months at a time. Can he help England’s iffy batting techniques in Test cricket? Or will he require a top drawer batting coach?

All of the above doesn’t even go as far as cover the optics of what message it shows regarding appointing a guy off the TV as Managing Director and an ex-player with little T20 coaching experience as a T20 coach. Yes, they might do a good job, and yes, they might have refreshing ideas - I like Key’s approach so far - but it’s something of a kick in the teeth for those ex-players, coaches and administrators who have tried to do it the right way, learning their trade on the job and/or taking managerial degrees. Do you need to be an ex-international cricketer to get these jobs? I would argue no - but it appears it’s pretty much a prerequisite right now.

Along these lines, I got a message off someone this morning - it reads as follows:-

“So the ECB in the last few weeks have:

Hired an MD with no background or experience in the role

Named a captain before hiring a head coach or selector

Said captain has already stated where Root will bat and which bowlers he’ll be selecting - before the head coach or selector are even in post

Look set to hire a head coach with no red ball experience/track record of success

Just thought I’d check in to see if you’re ok - no reports online of you spontaneously combusting yet!”

Well…I’m not spontaneously combusting just yet, but with the positives and negatives listed above, it seems clear to me that these appointments represent something of a gamble.

In fact, not just something of a gamble, but one which will leave Rob Key with a career-defining legacy. If McCullum is successful, Key will be lauded as a genius, but if he fails, it’s the sort of risky appointment which see many administrators back in the queue for their next job.

At least it will be exciting to see what happens next.

* Thanks so much to everyone who has bought me a coffee. It is much appreciated! *