Memo to sports administrators: when the time comes to choose a replacement for a successful coach or manager, pay no attention whatsoever to the outgoing man’s recommendation. Take on board his views on who should be his successor, by all means, and assure him that his suggestions will be given due consideration. Then run headlong in the opposite direction.
The evidence is increasingly persuasive. Sir Clive Woodward thought that Andy Robinson was the best man to succeed him as head coach of England’s rugby team; Sir Alex Ferguson anointed David Moyes as his next in line at Manchester United. Neither of the nominated successors came close to acquiring a knighthood.
And when Paul Downton came into his job as managing director of England cricket, he canvassed the views of Andy Flower. Despite England’s spectacular unravelling during the latter days of his tenure, Flower’s endorsement rightly still carried much weight at the time. But the evidence of England’s performance at the World Cup suggests that his nomination of Peter Moores was misguided.
The case of Woodward and Robinson was a familiar example of the outgoing coach backing the promotion of his No2, a model of succession planning that so often backfires. Ferguson, meanwhile, saw much of his younger self in Moyes. In both cases, these recommendations were infused by traces of the ego that had contributed to their own success in the job: ‘if I am not around, this bloke is the next best thing’. The same ego did not make them a dispassionate observer on who should follow in their footsteps.
Flower’s recommendation of Moores was a different case. When the successes of Moores’ abortive first term as England coach are recalled – bringing on James Anderson and Stuart Broad, and reintroducing Graeme Swann – the hiring of Flower as batting coach counted high among them. Flower had worked closely with Moores and, in the course of leading England to three consecutive Ashes series wins, he recognised that much of the groundwork for his success had been done by his predecessor. So it is easy to see why his views were so influential in persuading Downton to take the risk of appointing a head coach who had already failed in the job once.
Advertisement
There was more to it than that, though. Flower’s relationship with Ashley Giles, his expected replacement, had become strained while the two men were competing for playing resources in their roles in charge of the Test and one-day teams, so perhaps this hardened Flower’s feelings in favour of Moores. Maybe Flower felt that Moores deserved another turn after the unseemly circumstances of his departure first time around.
Either way, unless Moores is given the time to stage a salvage operation, the evidence of England’s World Cup demise suggests that the outgoing coach has got it wrong once again.