“Coach” had the virtue of deniability: if it all blew up, Venables, like some Mission Impossible agent, could be thrown to the sharks or the Sugars – hey, he was never really England manager anyway! Maybe it was modernisation. Taylor was the Stakhanovite, with his emphasis on sheer industry and productivity; Venables would give creativity and flair a chance. There was never any question of Glenn Hoddle becoming manager – he went straight in as coach Coaches are taking over Managers are not sexy.The word is an American re- import There is a justification for this evolution. A coach is more hands-on, he does not fear getting his boots dirty A coach wears a tracksuit not a suit and tie. Coach is classless.Personally, I regret the passing of “manager”, with its connotations of Ramseyian wisdom and vision and dignity There is an element of nostalgia in this But there is another drawback to the Americanism. In the television soap opera Cheers, “Coach” was an amiable, ageing imbecile.Andy Martin. The Acfield Report is not an awe-inspiring document.

This should not be seen as a criticism of the luminaries in the working party: more that there was actually not that much which could be done to improve the management of English cricket. One essential fact was grasped, however, which was that this management must be free from the sometime parochial interests and influence of the first-class counties. Hence their cornerstone recommendation of an England Management Committee to run all aspects of England’s international cricket. To quote from the report: “The working party recommends that the EMC be delegated by the TCCB [Test and County Cricket Board] to decide on and implement all aspects of the selection, management and administration of England teams.”
Autonomy for the EMC is essential if it is to work. It is the sort of power which I believe Raymond Illingworth and Ted Dexter both sought and which often comes with an authority of one.

Yet the working party recognised the inherent difficulties of this dictatorial approach and instead opted for a committee, but one which could be autocratic in its powers because of its independence from the TCCB. It would have “delegated” powers for “all aspects”.Now we find, however, that on the point which most players would regard as the most important, the TCCB have clipped this new committee’s wings. The chairman of the EMC will not have the right to withdraw players from county matches if he deems it necessary.Dominic Cork will continue to average playing two days out of three throughout the year while his Australian counterpart, Glenn McGrath, will play only one out of three.Our own experience at Worcester this year does not help my argument, in that Graeme Hick’s omission from our line-up for one game did not lead to renewed and refreshed success for him. However, Worcester, in an enlightened manner, recognised the pre-eminence of the national side. Only if this spirit proliferates will we bridge this county versus country divide and improve our national team’s chances of success.Other aspects of the report address this same central problem of club pulling in the opposite direction from country. I am delighted to see in the report that, while the TCCB will continue to nominate candidates to sit on the various committees and act as selectors, the EMC retains the right to select from outside these nominations. This, combined with the payment of selectors, should ensure the best possible people are involved.