phelans shorts
Full Member
Cricket is the only sport I can think of where traditionally there was separation between the coaching staff and the selectors. For me it always seemed very old fashioned and drummed up images of a bunch of old out of touch guys picking a team/squad. Moving to the situation where the coach picked the team made a lot of sense to me because this is how it works in almost any other sport and it provides much clearer lines of responsibility. However, I'm now seeing calls to go back to how it was with a dedicated selector.
Why is cricket so different in this respect? Why shouldn't a national coach be able to select the side they're going to take into battle?
It’s actually more similar than you’d think, for instance look at football. It’s not uncommon in the slightest for managers to have little/no input in training, or on the other side of that for a director of football to be involved in signings etc…
With cricket you have the added complication of how much time is spent on the road, it can make players a lot more closed off because they know if they go to their coach with a problem they have, be it confidence crash they’re going through or whatever, then it’s got a strong chance of effecting future selection if the coach is also selector. This makes players more likely to keep any issues to themselves which then bubble up and get much much worse.
Coaches usually have a spot in the room for selection discussions, as they should do, but for me it’s absolutely correct that there are other people in that room with other insights.