Tigerblood said:
Phantom, from reading Steve Waugh's autobiography Out of My Comfort Zone, it's pretty clear that the appointment of Bob Simpson as coach was the crucial factor in the turnaround of the Australian cricket team. Waugh says that before Simpson, the team went about things in a fairly semi-professional manner: e.g., not training particularly hard and drinking before and during matches.
Simpson came along and completely turned all that upside down. He insisted they train like a real game: e.g., the fielding drills were so intense that you could easily get badly hurt if you didn't concentrate for the complete session.
Also, Waugh points out that Border was a gritty man but not a great leader. He had poor communication skills, was fairly unimaginative, and did not want to run the show off-field. He simply did the deeds out in the middle and expected others to do the same. As a result, Simpson filled all the gaps. When Mark Taylor came along as captain, Simpson got his nose out of joint because Taylor wanted to be the main man both on field and off field.
Don't know what lessons there are in this, other than those we already know. To be winners, we'll have to reach the same level of professionalism as the top clubs (might be difficult given lack of funds), and you can't underestimate the value of a top coach.
Yes.
I would agree with the detail you have posted.
Simpson, as a coaching appointment, sped the development of the young Australians, but again it took time. For him, It was 2-3 years after his appointment that the Aussies won the 1987 World Cup, which I would metaphorically compare to the the AFL Pre-season competition. But it wasn't until 1989, some 4-5 years later that the Aussies won The Ashes back. It wasn't until 1994, 10 years later, with both Border & Simpson gone, that Australia stamped itself as clearly the World Champion Cricket team.
Border wasn't a great captain, but he was a good captain. He was prepared to use every ounce of his ability towards team success. He had the "mental fortitude" to withstand the pressure-cooker of defeat until victories could be achieved.
Taylor was what the Australian team ultimately needed to become consistant winners. A captain who could coordinate team efforts to maximum advantage. It was my belief then, and I still hold to it, that if Taylor had been appointed earlier, back in 1990, Australia would have won the 1990 series in the West Indies and become World Champions 4 years earlier.
As an aside, I'm even more certain that had Taylor had been maintained as captain for the famous VSS Laxman series in India, he would NOT have sent the Indians back in, and Australia would have won that test & the series. Every knowledgeable cricketing fan knew, immediately when Waugh made that decision to send India back in, that he'd erred. Nothing is more useless on a battlefield than exhausted artillery.
Personally, the lesson for me is that:
1. Transition from regular defeat to regular victory takes time.
2. One person, or one group, is NOT the end to a solution but merely the first step.
3. Ultimate success comes from continually building along a progressive path.
4. That the leadership structure of the RFC will continue to evolve until ultimate success is reached.
