Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Does he think that coaches bear no weight when it comes to results? Not in too many professional sports I know of.

He said he felt like he had been kicked in the guts upon the delivery of the Argus review last month, and Cricket Australia's adoption of its recommendations.

Good! Although perhaps that kick should have been aimed a little lower.

Steve Rixon, spare me days. Another made man of the NSW mafia.


Johnson. South Africa. One Test - no performance - give him the boot? Or should he be dropped first? Is he Australia's Harmison?

If he should be dropped - who to bring in? Bollinger/Siddle/Pattison?


For those who think I've tried to hijack this thread...Nielsen is a footnote. That's what he's done for Australian cricket.


Whaddaya talking about, Nick?!? Teflon has skillfully overseen our surge from No.5 to No.4. We ought to sign him up for another three years.

The Don has risen

Coaches are over-rated.
Show me a great coach and I will show you the great players in any sport.

We had great players but now we do not. Until we get some , which based on history will probably some time, it is likely we will have a competent side but no more.


Tim Nielsen - 'world's best coach'.


Now it's Troy the Boy. They brought him back from Englalond to teach the bowlers all about reverse swing and they all promptly went to custard. Although Johnson already was.


I'm starting to think Troy is the Manchurian bowling coach, surreptitiously sent by the Poms to assassinate Australian fast bowling.


"Does he think that coaches bear no weight when it comes to results? Not in too many professional sports I know of."

The role of a coach in cricket is a lot different than any other professional sport. Many of the decisions that would be made by a coach in other sports are made by the captain in cricket. A cricket coach is just there to help players get better at the game, he doesn't make any strategic or tactical decisions, and plays no role at all when the game is underway.


Are you saying that the coaches have nothing to do with strategy at international level?


The new management are clearly AGB readers.

"Trying to bowl as few no-balls as we can at training, and take that into the game,'' he said. ''We've had a huge focus on catching. We felt that's one area we can really improve on. And one area we've struggled a bit in the last couple of years is losing clumps of wickets. In the nets we've been focusing really hard on our first 10 or 20 balls, trying to get through that and build an innings from there."

No balls, catching and clatters. All fixable and all have been shitting me for years.


One of the more aggravating aspects of those three problems is that they were in evidence prior to the champions retiring, it's just that Warne and McGrath (in particular) were continually able to pull us out of the shit.

When we lost those two, and injuries and disinterest cut a swathe through McGain, MacGill, and a raft of fast bowlers, we were no longer able to recover from poor positions or even, in some instances, to capitalise on strong positions.

The thing is, no balls, catching and clatters, while a huge part of our current malaise, should have been addressed as long ago as 2003/04 when catching became a serious issue against India.


Speaking of McGain and MacGill:

We counted on MacGill to play on - Nielsen

Stuart MacGill threw Australian cricket's plan for life after Shane Warne into a state of confusion when he retired almost two years earlier than expected, the former national coach Tim Nielsen has said.

Nielsen revealed in an interview with ESPNcricinfo that the team expected MacGill to play on until the end of 2009, rather than ending his career in the middle of the 2008 West Indies tour.

Such a path would have had MacGill face India, New Zealand, South Africa and then England on the 2009 Ashes tour. Instead, his retirement started a cycle of scatter-shot spin bowling selections that continued unabated for three years, and may only be settling now after Nathan Lyon's success on his first Test tour in Sri Lanka.

And I still maintain that losing McGain in India in 2008 cost us the 2009 Ashes.


Teflon on why Boiled was dropped after South Africa 2009:

Andrew McDonald did not play again despite being part of the South African success. Why was that?

He filled a role but it was in some regards conditional: the conditions in South Africa allowed us to not play a spinner, and we had Marcus North in the side. We were still desperate to play with three quicks and a spinner as a legitimate frontline attack, and to be honest we felt if there was going to be an allrounder playing in our side it was going to be Shane Watson. At that stage Shane was still coming to terms with his body and getting himself right, so it wasn't about chopping Andrew McDonald off but asking, "Is this the sort of formula that will get us back to being the best team?" The balance of three quicks plus a medium-pacer plus a part-time spinner we didn't feel was the right thing forever. It won us a series in conditions that suited, but I don't know if it would've had lasting impact.


There are so many things wrong with the logic there I don't know where to start, so I won't.


If that's an example of the stuff from Tefly, I'm glad I haven't read anything else.

He's kind of faded into the wallpaper already. Punter will be next, he's seeming more irrelevant by the day.


The "conditions in South Africa allowed us to not play a spinner" looks daft in light of the Fifth Test a few months later when the conditions at the Oval suggested they should play a spinner, but instead they did think a "balance of three quicks plus a medium-pacer plus a part-time spinner" was right.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)