The other Schofield
John Stern feels Ken Schofield's appointment to review one whitewash won't produce another whitewash
John Stern
18-Jan-2007
![]() |
![]()
|
The last time a man called Schofield was involved with the England cricket
team, they were clutching at straws searching vainly for a winning
formula.
Six years ago, Chris Schofield, a novice legspinner and a 'Pommie Shane
Warne', we were told, was handed a central contract, picked for a couple of
Tests and has barely been heard of again.
What's in a name? Ken Schofield, no relation, is a hot-shot golf
administrator hired by the England Cricket Board (ECB) to rake over the Ashes. Unlike his wrist-spinning namesake, he looks pretty well qualified for the task at
hand. He turned the European golf tour from a 17-event fairground
attraction with £430,000 worth of prize money into a £71m circus with
almost three times the number of tournaments. He knows and loves his
cricket and is involved with the Surrey Youth Trust.
He also knows how to make money. But making money is not the issue, though
how money is spent might come under the remit of his review team, which
also comprises Nasser Hussain, Mike Atherton and Angus Fraser.
English cricket loves nothing better than a crisis or even the sense of
impending crisis. You can see it on people's faces, hear it in the tone of
their voices. Comedians, starved for a good few years of jokes at English
cricket's expense, are rejoicing that a 5-0 Ashes roasting gives them the
right to sneer again. Normal service has resumed. It's sad.
Sports fans are not much good at perspective and British fans are worse
than most. And we're really bad at self-loathing (or is that good at
self-loathing? I'm not sure.) But now is the time for a bit of perspective.
Stephen Fleming had it right when he said the answer to getting over being
thrashed by Australia was to "play another team". He might conceivably
have been suggesting that England select another team but we'll give him
the benefit of the doubt that he was talking about facing a different
opposition.
![]() ![]() |
The ECB's announcement - before the Ashes had even finished - that they
were setting up this review group had a whiff of spin doctoring about it,
responding swiftly to the something-must-be-done frenzy. Being charitable,
one can say they were being proactive and decisive, not adjectives often
associated with English cricket administrators. But also it gives off the
vibe that the game is in crisis when it patently isn't.
Admittedly, the mission statement of the review group is targeted solely
at the way the England team is run and interestingly states winning a
global one-day event as a specific goal. That is a shift in emphasis.
Previous ECB mission statements have specified only Test No. 1 status as
the goal.
And there you have it. It has become increasingly and embarrassingly
obvious that England don't take one-dayers seriously enough and that
includes media and supporters too. The ECB knows it. They don't need
consultants to tell them that.
David Collier, the ECB's chief executive, is a smart man. His post-Ashes
comments about learning lessons indicate that he has a pretty clear idea
that a bucketful of mistakes were made. There is a management debrief
after every England tour. You'd figure that all the issues about
preparation and methods of selection could be dealt with there.
Maybe Collier worries that nothing would change. Maybe Duncan Fletcher has
been invested with so much power at the ECB that he wouldn't be challenged
from within. Or maybe it is the players who can't be challenged
internally. Hence, the desire for external consultants.
Whatever Ken Schofield and his group do come up with, we can assume it
won't be a whitewash. Once is enough for one winter.
John Stern is editor of The Wisden Cricketer