"Fredalo" and Vaughan: Great Stuff

England Cricket captain Michael Vaughan's interview with Donald McRae in Tuesday's Guardian is just Reversal Theory "gold dust".

When I saw it I thought: "I just have to keep that". So, here it is.

"You have to be honest: the Fredalo incident did affect the team,'" he is quoted as saying.....

"That incident changed the whole atmosphere in the camp. We went into the New Zealand game with a really good attitude but we didn't play well and after 'Fredalo' we just started taking it all too seriously. That might sound silly but everyone was too tense and desperate. There was no escape - and even on the field you have to be pretty free, especially in one-day cricket."

This quote says very clearly that there was a climate in the camp that encouraged the Serious state. There's also something about the Conforming state too, his description of tension and suggests that at the time anxiety was rife - which is a response to the serious and conforming states. Certainly, the whole squad would have been more aware of 'rules' after the incident.

"I was more tense than I've ever been as a captain. Duncan Fletcher was more tense than he'd ever been as a coach. And sometimes the captain and coach have to look at the way they're acting because the team follows. I didn't captain as well as I should've done because of the pressure I put myself under. I'd admit that. But I couldn't switch off because away from the field there was so much going on - with Bob Woolmer and 'Fredalo'."

Of course the interesting dynamic that creates the emotional intensity of the situation is the media spotlight that surrounded the camp after the incident, and the whole tournament after the death of Bob Woolmer. This is almost certain to have raised the intensity, pressure and sense of importance of the situation, all of which would pile on the anxiety.... .....and hamper creativity.

Interesting too the acknowledgement that the team leadership was exceptionally tense. We know from experience that that will affect the players.

So what could they have done differently?

Well, I'm not suggesting that it would be the right thing to do as the England Cricket Team, but perhaps if they had just treated the whole incident as a bit of a laugh, they might have actually played better!

Why? Well, the whole camp would probably have been less "serious", and they might even have felt a little "naughty" in a fun way (playful and rebellious), rather than the way it was handled which seemed to enforce discipline. This might actually have translated to the field in the form of greater creativity and innovation.

I'm sure the ECB would struggle with this as an approach, but it just goes to show that bureaucracy and performance don't always mix well.