The field of cricket coaching has grown considerably in recent times. The Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) has struggled to keep pace with developments in the field, which suggests there are many personal and organisational failures within the PCB from engaging in a successful coaching relationship. However, the recent decision to appoint Inzamam-ul-Haq as the chief selector of Pakistan may provide an uncertain message about what makes an effective coaching relationship, and how this might differ for all parties invested in the coaching mechanism: players, coach and the PCB. Coaching has become increasingly accepted as a learning and development strategy, which is capable of enhancing the performance of the majority of cricket players around the world. The outcome of this is that cricket boards and cricket teams in premier leagues are witnessing a sizeable volume of ex-cricketers both requesting and being recommended for coaching. Irrespective of whether coaching is delivered by internal or external coach it is expensive. This raises two key concerns for the PCB seeking to maximise their expenditure on coaching: selection of coaching candidate, and support for the implementation of their coaching development plans. First, the PCB may be forced to select amongst coaching candidates. Hence, it may be prudent for them to select those candidates whose coaching related development will facilitate the greatest organisational gains. Whilst any conceptualisation of gains will have a content component aligned with the PCB’s strategic aims, it will also have a process component associated with the coaching client’s capacity to develop via coaching and to translate their development into work performance. Secondly, if the PCB is to maximise their coaching investment they may benefit from providing support interventions for coaching clients who are less likely to translate their development into work performance. Attending to the issues surrounding coach selection and support relies upon understanding the candidate’s role in coaching success. There is currently no agreement regarding what constitutes a successful coaching outcome. The strength of the coaching relationship or working alliance between player and coach is the most powerful predictor of coaching outcomes. Spending time building a strong relationship with a player is critical for successful and effective coaching, and it is perceived this way by both coach and player alike. Specifically, it is important to build a rapport that is task-focused, with clear and achievable goals, as this leads to successful outcomes more so than just focusing on developing a close relationship or bond. This gives the coaching conversation a clear direction that is action-oriented, and facilitates the strengthening of the relationship between both parties. Another important predictor of effective coaching is the degree to which players can motivate themselves, their self-efficacy, or if you like, ego strength or self-confidence. A well-functioning coaching relationship might also help to ignite and maintain a players’ self-motivation over time. Successfully achieving set goals could certainly boost ego strength and support momentum in the long term. This, in turn, might have a direct bearing on personal and career development. Cricket coaching is a form of organisational learning through one-to-one conversations that facilitates development for a leader. It can be used in a variety of ways, for example, getting past an impasse, removing a stumbling block or drawing out and building on strengths. Undoubtedly, there has been a flurry of activity around coaching, and people are asking why. Why there are so many books, so many courses, even master’s programmes, on cricket coaching? Why are so many consultants and therapists interested in becoming coaches? Why do we see professional coaching accreditation, international foundations and conferences? The first reason is probably the most influential. Over the last 20 years or so there has been a profound change in how coaching is viewed. In the past it was seen as remedial: if you heard the word coaching you would assume there was a problem. Now coaching has progressed from having a stigma attached to it to affording status: coaching has become an indication that one’s company considers one worth an investment. Moreover, this is because an immense pool of money has happened in sport cultures — players and cricket boards are more willing to admit to themselves and to others that they need the help of professionals to succeed in their professional competitions. This is increasingly seen as something to be proud of, as demonstrating emotional intelligence and insight. The second development is that nowadays cricket coaches are much less interested in making dogmatic statements about one view or another. They want to use whatever works, borrowing ideas from different approaches. They ask themselves what will work for this particular person, at this particular moment, with this particular question. Of course, it is a big and costly commitment, and it is correct that chief selectors and coaches seek to satisfy the needs of their job description and their own coaching commitments first rather than work with an attitude and detachment that jeopardises their own effectiveness. However, it is also important and necessary for the PCB to develop a better understanding of overall coaching outcomes based on true scientific evidence rather than assumptions. If this is neglected, then the profession is vulnerable to criticism, and open to risks such as misjudging the situation, aggravating the status quo, or abusing the coach’s power. The role of personality structure on coaching effectiveness is much smaller than anticipated. Moreover, matching on the basis of personality preferences appears to produce no clear improvement in the effectiveness of coaching. This likely suggests that other factors play a greater role than personality in coaching. More than likely, players, style of coaching and work environment factors are all associated with coaching success. It might be more important to focus on coach selection in terms of qualifications, accreditation and supervision records rather than on player-coach matching. In my opinion, personality factors and personality matching are likely to play a lesser role as a predictor of success in head coaching. These are important findings that, I hope, may guide the development of the profession and the choices that are made in the recruitment, development, and deployment and matching of PCB coaches and the coaching field as a whole. The writer is a professor of psychiatry and consultant forensic psychiatrist in the UK. He can be contacted at fawad_shifa@yahoo.com