Time For Moores To Deliver

Moores - cricket's answer to Steve McClaren?

Did Peter Moores consider his resignation over the weekend?

Upon appointment as England coach he boldly declared: "My biggest challenge is to make the players better."

And how is that working out?

Since the 2007 Ashes/World Cup debacles that did for Duncan Fletcher, England have suffered Test series defeats to nil against India, Sri Lanka and (The Oval dead rubber notwithstanding) South Africa. Of course there have been successes over West Indies and New Zealand but the simple fact of the matter is that Moores is yet to win a Test, never mind a series, when anything but overwhelming favourite.

So, did Moores spend Saturday night seriously reviewing his position?

It is a fair enough question. Michael Vaughan essentially resigned due to poor results. The skipper may have pretended otherwise - "I have no doubts about my captaincy ability. Absolutely none. But I am not scoring runs" - but he surely didn't believe it. If so, he missed the point.

Compared to contemporaries Ricky Ponting and Graeme Smith, captain Vaughan has never been a consistently prolific contributor with the bat. Brilliant as that duo are, as a former world number one Vaughan rightly aspires to be in their company. He has not managed it, but we neither noticed nor cared during victories over Australia and South Africa.

Since returning from an extended injury lay-off his batting average has certainly declined further - his fluent best looking further and further away - but it has not been the freefall the right-hander would like to think. The burden of captaincy has always been apparent at the crease.

It is important to remember just how keenly England anticipated Vaughan's 2007 return: but for his leadership, not his batting. His departure now is a relief because his leadership has failed by any measure since that return; individual batting performances hardly come into it. This South Africa series was 'to find out how good England really are' and the answer is emphatically, 'Not good enough.' Vaughan has therefore resigned, but where is the coach in all of this?

Fletcher was a man of many flaws but his England were unmistakably a product of the coach's methods. Bowling and fielding were done to meticulous plans, batsmen's techniques subject to endless fine-tuning, selection dogmatically imposed to fit the desired structure. If all of these some times felt 'paralysis by analysis' then there nevertheless was a definitive strategy.

Moores has always looked cricket's answer to Steve McClaren. He has pledged to improve things without explaining how, dressing his 'ideas' in dubious management speak. The Edgbaston defeat was doubtless described not as leaving South Africa with an unassailable lead but "placing England permanently behind the eight-ball in an unsustainable win-lose matrix going forward".

He has also demonstrated a McClaren-esque bent for over-supporting his players against all common sense. Two that stand out are his reactions to Matt Prior's pathetic wittering (turn down the stump microphones) and Vaughan's century versus New Zealand (Ashes captaincy settled).

How exactly is Moores trying to improve England behind the scenes? There was early talk of closer links with county cricket - and the triumph of recalling Ryan Sidebottom. But the selection shop has, Pattinson-gate excepted, remained resolutely closed since.

There was a promise to be less dictatorial than Fletcher: "You try to find a system whereby you help the players to have the freedom to play. When a batsman walks out, rather than striving for success, I want him to have a freer mind which says, 'I know I can play.'" But the batting has lacked conviction and discipline.

It would be interesting to know how Moores gets on with Kevin Pietersen. Only last May Moores said: "It is important to have a mature captain, especially when you are developing as a team. We have had quite a lot of changes in both Test and one-day teams, and we have an inexperienced set of bowlers, so to have somebody like Michael to marshal them and give his experience is very important."

Whatever Pietersen's strengths, captaincy experience is not one of them. The new skipper stressed their "really good" first meeting on Monday, as you'd expect, and even emerged pledging that the pair are "looking forward". Of course they are.

But among the biggest advantages of appointing KP captain is the example he will set in preparation. No-one is more industrious or meticulous in the build-up to games. If Pietersen senses his team are not well prepared - Moores' essential responsibility - then those around him will be the first to know about it.

Fletcher thrived in part because he forged excellent relationships with Nasser Hussain and Vaughan. Moores and Vaughan have never seemed natural partners but the coach was always likely to outlive the captain.

That is no longer the case. England's new skipper is no stranger to an empty media quip himself, but he is a man of action too. Moores must deliver results quickly or no amount of positive thinking will save him.

Peter May