Andy Moles has been unceremoniously dumped from the Black Caps. That is an amazing turn of events. One could say it is like sport in Pakistan where powerful men can change the team on their command.

Why has this occurred? It has been said that several players were unhappy that the BCs were basically going nowhere with tactics and technique. Geoff Allot, who I went to school with at Christchurch Boys' (although, he like Dave Hewitt in rugby, mainly played 2nds) is general manager cricket at NZC. He obviously still has good contacts within the team and this is likely how he got a sniff of discontent. John Wright's role is elite coaching manager.
Geoff must have felt he was forced to further investigate the information he was hearing. This must have turned up some pretty strong facts in order for NZ Cricket to take this drastic action. It is not exactly a good look so to carry through with it – there must have been very good reason.
As players professionally and as amateurs we have all had coaches that we thought did not offer much value. The classic catch cry from a poor coach in my mind has always been "the players are too soft", and or "they need to get mentally tougher". Once I hear that I usually know the coach is struggling and he uses this old beauty to try and take heat off himself. In some cases guys can be soft, often when they find the coach unbearable to play for or the captain.
When you hear culture being talked about, don't be fooled in thinking it is namby pamby stuff about guys drinking green tea and sitting in daffodils. It means that players want the same thing as the coaches and they don't want to rip the throats out of the management staff or other players; can be some classic situations when things go awry. I know of one Auckland cricketer that left the association after a fight with the coach in the changing room. Another time I was with a player and a coach who almost had a fight on the Wellington waterfront – alcohol can loosen lips.
How does a coach prepare players for "battle"? One of the best examples of preparation for me was The Art of War by Machiavelli. In this book of high military science he took you through step by step how Roman soldiers were prepared by their "trainers". Training was considered the most important tactic of the Roman army.
Hours every day was spent on their group fighting techniques with different weapons and then as individuals. The goal was to learn strategies and tactics to enable them to fight together as a single unit. Within Europe they were never really matched. Only a different enemy on light quick horses from the Eastern Steppes got around Roman formation and tactics.
The trainers thought of ways to simulate real battle situations and then trained the responses. In battle the soldiers did not really think, they just followed the orders and training as each situation unfolded. They were said to be "mentally tough" but in reality they did not have to think and just acted as one. This is way more coordinated and quick than 20 guys with different thoughts.
This is the role of the coach in my opinion. To find what the opposition, or nowadays media, motels, foreign public – especially Aussie, will put up against you and then somehow devise ways to simulate it in practise so in the match one just naturally responds quickly and effectively.
I do admit it can be hard in cricket though. When Sri Lanka has weapons such as Murali or Australia having Warne, how does a coach simulate that kind of pressure??? I remember being coached by Steve Hansen for Christchurch Old Boys rugby. We were doing blindside moves and I mentioned about what if the opposition knew we were doing the move, would we be caught short. His reply was, "Every opposition usually knows when the AB's will go blind, but done well they can't stop it anyway."
This is like the Romans in their phalanx position. You knew it is coming but what do you do? – So good preparation is key.