Transparency is still lacking in appointing Hundred coaches

Raf Nicholson looks at the appointment of coaches within all forms of the game and argues that maybe it is time for a rethink

- Raf Nicholson

The past week has seen the first announcements regarding coaches for the Women’s Hundred next year. We now know that current Australia Women coach Matthew Mott will coach the Women’s Western Fire franchise, that Lisa Keightley, former coach of the England Women’s Academy, will take on the Lord’s-based team, and that former England batsman Lydia Greenway will head up the other London franchise, the Oval Invincibles.

All have an excellent pedigree in the women’s game. Keightley, who represented Australia between 1995 and 2005, is a former coach of the Australia Women’s team, and current head coach of the Perth Scorchers in the WBBL. Mott has been coach of Australia since 2015, winning the 2018 World Twenty20 and overseeing three successful Ashes campaigns in that time. Greenway is a former World Cup winner who now runs her own coaching business.

However, like many aspects of the Women’s Hundred, the reality of the way these appointments are being made has struggled to match up to the rhetoric. The ECB had previously made assurances that an open and transparent appointments process would be in place for the tournament, but what seems to have occurred is much more in keeping with existing procedures.

Gary Kirsten, who will oversee the men’s Cardiff team, explained the process thus: “I got a call from (Glamorgan chief executive) Hugh Morris to see if I was interested.” It’s a clear example of recruitment taking place through existing social networks, with jobs not even being advertised. Presumably this was also the case for other appointments as well, in both the men’s and women’s competitions.