Cardiff Local Guide A guide to all Things Cardiff
This was all so different. I had done some batting coaching myself, and I had
just done what most coaches had done with me. In other words point out a lot
of technical faults, without really suggesting any solutions, and also
probably pointing out the faults at the wrong time.
So many coaches do that. It is called job justification. It is not very good.
As Fletcher has always said: “It is much easier to destroy a player than
make one.”
The best batting coaches will bide their time, trying to find the out-of-place
domino that means everything does not fall into place, and then deciding on
the correct time when to try to slip it back into line.
It is a tricky business, and only those with strong characters and absolute
trust in their methods can resist the ‘talk-for-its-sake’ approach.
I mention this now because Mark
Ramprakash has just been appointed England’s
batting coach and I have been asked many times how I think he will do.
My answer is that I have no idea. That is because coaching is so removed from
playing that unless you have had first-hand experience of the person in
question, it is almost impossible to pass judgment.
What I can say is that Ramprakash was probably the best batting technician of
my generation and that he had clearly had to work through some problems
during his career.
The cliche goes that great players do not necessarily make great coaches.
Well, I also believe that no player necessarily makes a good coach.
Yes, of course, there is a lot of knowledge ready to be used, but the two
tasks are just so separate as to give any guarantees. A complete change in
mindset is required.
Playing is mostly about taking. Coaching is almost solely about giving. It is
not about personal achievement; it is about helping others reach personal
achievements.
It is also said that captains make good coaches. But again there is a subtle
difference. If you make a cock-up as captain, you can atone for it with a
brilliant individual performance. A coach cannot do that.
Cricket coaching has changed. In days gone by it was a sinecure at most
counties for the side’s best player. Now it is not quite like football, but
it does have its pressures, and its fair number of sackings too.
But one thing has not altered. It is still all about the players.
Last week I spent one of the more fascinating 90 minutes of my life listening
to Sir Ian McGeechan and Steve Hansen talking about rugby coaching.
The outstanding thread to their conversation was about the empowerment of the
players, about how both tried to ensure that their players felt as if they
were making the decisions, even if, of course, they were not.
McGeechan often describes the coach’s role as being that of a “benevolent
dictator”. Obviously rugby is different from cricket in its role for the
head coach, but I think that sums up succinctly how a coach should think.
He should ultimately get what he wants – no point being there otherwise – but
it is how he reaches that point that is key. By benevolence is as good a way
as any.
It is like that with coaching batting. The best coaches make the batsman think
that he has come up with the idea, that he has solved the problem himself.
For instance, in the 2005 Ashes
Andrew Strauss was struggling to play Shane Warne. Fletcher suggested how
best to counter that, but Strauss said he was happy with his own method.
Fletcher agreed and sat back. Guess what happened? Halfway through the series
Strauss went to Fletcher and said: “I’ve got to change my method.”
Clever that. I look forward to hearing similar stories about Ramprakash in the
future.
