David Lloyd says Andy Flower deserves a chance to succeed Peter Moores as England head coach.
Flower in mix for long-term role, says Bumble
What a week it's been and we haven't even got an England coach yet!
I'll throw in two possible candidates in from left-field, if you like, straightaway - Stephen Fleming from New Zealand and Darren Lehmann from Australia.
I've also heard Tom Moody mentioned but one thing is for sure, whoever is appointed - and I can tell you this from first-hand experience - will be getting a great job, albeit one that isn't as big as some people make it out to be.
Let's analyse the coach's position: he doesn't pick the team for a start, he doesn't do tactics on the field - that is down to the captain. As Duncan Fletcher said, you are the first lieutenant to the captain. You are his eyes and ears, you prepare the team - you clear the decks to make sure they can perform to the best of their ability.
It isn't as high-profile as other sports; if we think the cricket coach is like Arsene Wenger or Sir Alex Ferguson think again, he isn't. I think the ECB will be looking for somebody with good man-management skills who can work alongside the captain.
Andy Flower is certainly in the mix on merit. He has a very good pedigree and was a wonderful player. He was No 1 in the world when he played as a batsman and he is a no-nonsense character. He's had it tough; he's from Zimbabwe, he knows what tough is. I would expect him to get the job in the short-term, but don't discount him for the long-term.
Galvanise
England now have a leader at the head of the team as captain, in Andrew Strauss, and it's his job to galvanise the whole team and I'm absolutely certain he will do that.
There will always be divisions and differences of opinion in any team, and I'm talking about a team of 20-22 people here when you include the backroom staff and back-up players.
But when you go over that white line you respect each other and what you're doing. I think Andrew will be able to sort out the differences. I think he will do that job.
Sometime ago when England's genius player Ian Botham was captain it didn't work but Mike Brearley got the very best out of him because Brearley was a leader.
Sorry
I admire Peter Moores in a different way. He had a great pedigree with a lot of players that he had worked with saying how good he was. I feel desperately sorry for him.
I didn't see that Moores had to lose his job here. There will always be that difference and if Pietersen had stepped back into the ranks as a player Moores would have to work alongside the captain, Strauss, to get the very best out of Pietersen.
I saw Hugh Morris saying there was no other way. Well, he was well-thought of three weeks ago by the board. He was craving results, but results are down to the team not to him.
Having been a player a long, long time ago and then a coach fairly recently, I don't think the events of the last 24 hours will be a problem at all to players. They will shrug their shoulders and get along with the job of representing England.
I thought Steve Harmison was exceptional the other day when he said 'this is not about Peter Moores, this is not about Kevin Pietersen, this is about the England cricket team going forward'.
Swagger
I think the players will more or less take this in their stride. I think they will all be very happy that Andrew is captain and they will be delighted that Kevin stays in the team as a player.
I expect Pietersen to take all this in his stride. He said when he took the job that if it doesn't work out he'd go back to rank-and-file. He could score 200 in that game, that's the way he is. I like the whole package that is Kevin Pietersen; I like the swagger, the ability and the ego, it's a good ego.
But I do have problems about captaincy; I think you have got to be a born leader to do that. Look back at Michael Vaughan, Nasser Hussain, Alec Stewart and Michael Atherton - they were born leaders who got the very best out of players and its now down to the management to get the very best out of Pietersen.
