Darren Lehmann will relish Mickey Arthur's seat as cricket coach

THE timing of Mickey Arthur's axing is shocking, but it was the best thing Australian cricket could have done. The only surprise is it took so long.

WHEN you have spent half a lifetime in and around cricket teams, some things become apparent immediately.

One of those concerned Mickey Arthur, who was sacked yesterday as Australia's coach on the eve of the Ashes. It was clear to me that, having publicly humiliated four players for failing a trite task in India, he was a dead coach walking. The surprise was that his removal did not come sooner.

It was the nightmare tour of India that did for Arthur, not the consistently poor results since, not even the fallout from David Warner's late-night altercation with Joe Root, although neither of those things can have helped.

But a coach, whether new school, as Arthur was thought to be, or old school, as his replacement, Darren Lehmann, is perceived, needs to be a respected and trusted confidant of the players whatever his methods, outlook and ethos. That respect and trust clearly had dissipated after India.

The timing of Arthur's removal is shocking, coming as it does just 16 days before the start of the Ashes series. But on a tour of England where not one thing has gone right so far, it was the best thing Australian cricket could have done. The alternative was to stagger on through a home and away Ashes series with a leadership team and a group of players at loggerheads, disunited and divided like no other Australia team in living memory. It was better the rotten head was removed now.

That Arthur's time was running short could be gleaned from two press conferences given by James Sutherland, the chief executive of Cricket Australia. The first came in the aftermath of the tour of India, when the management team were put on notice.

While Sutherland was withering about the lack of discipline within the player group that had led to "homework-gate", he was also critical of a management team who had allowed things to get so out of hand: turning up late for meetings, failing to keep appointments with physiotherapists and poor "skinfold" tests reflected badly on the players but also the management, Sutherland said.

Sutherland was forced to pipe a familiar tune after Warner's late-night indiscretion in Birmingham. "Despicable" was the word used by Sutherland in relation to Warner, but neither the other players who were with Warner that night nor the management group avoided his critical eye. Put plainly, Australian cricket had become a laughing stock off the field and they were an irrelevance on it during the Champions Trophy, where a number of limp performances resulted in an early departure: Cricket Australia had to act.

The interview given by Arthur recently, during which he described Australia's bowling attack as the "best in the world depth-wise", could be seen as a final, desperate attempt to shore up his position. But there was a deep irony in his message that Australia had to be smarter in their public relations: it was an unwise thing to imply that the ECB had played politics over the Root and Warner affair, nor was it wise to heap more pressure on a group of young fast bowlers by referring to them in world-class terms.

Arthur is an extremely affable and approachable person. He has gone out of his way to stay on good terms with media outlets in Australia and is far more open (and indiscreet) than, say, Andy Flower, his English counterpart. In some ways, this helped him during the "homework" controversy in India, when Australian scribes were generally on his side rather than the players'. But good public relations can carry you only so far: reality eventually cuts through the small talk and the niceties.

Arthur has been known to play a cute game with the media, one aspect of which could be seen in his latest interview. Once again, he tried to stir up the situation between England and Kevin Pietersen by suggesting it would be interesting to see how well Pietersen would be reintegrated after his prolonged injury. Last year, England were not happy with Arthur's public comments about Pietersen. In one sense, then, England will not be sorry to see him go, but as one of their coaching staff confided to me recently, the appointment of Lehmann is likely to lead to a short-term gain for Australia. That will worry England to some extent.

It is Michael Clarke's position that is now the most interesting. The Australia captain had seemingly nailed his colours to Arthur's mast during all the recent troubles and may now be seen to be slightly isolated. But he is a political animal, someone who has been very adept at positioning himself to best effect, and no doubt he will move as smoothly as he can to galvanise his position with Australia's new coach. It remains to be seen how easily his leadership survives.

The immediate difference for Clarke in the aftermath of the change of management, forced by Sutherland and Pat Howard, the team performance manager, during their visit to Bristol over the past few days is that he forgoes his position as a selector. This must be a good thing: a captain can still have his say, of course, but it must be easier for his relationships with players if they feel he is not sitting in judgment over them at the selection table.

Until his appointment, Lehmann was coaching Australia A and Queensland, whom he led to the Sheffield Shield title. He was a fine player for Australia, having played 27 Tests and 117 one-day internationals during their great period, and is described of the "old school", meaning that he is known to like an after-match beer while discussing cricket.

But he is also highly respected for possessing a shrewd cricketing brain, as Yorkshire's players discovered during his stint with them as an overseas player. It is a hospital pass, for sure, and Lehmann cannot be expected to work miracles with a modest amount of talent. What he will instil, though, through his presence, his reputation, his stature and his straightforwardness, is some old-fashioned Australian togetherness.

Under Arthur, since the problems in India, they have had the worst of both worlds: not much good on the field, and warring off it. At least now the warring can stop. Australia have taken their first step out of disarray.

The Times