Dean Jones vs Mickey Arthur? Is Dean better?
Is Dean better? 2nd time he's won now with IU. Better record with his team. Good at identifying talent, Sharjeel, Asif Ali, Talat, Faheem etc. Seems to get more out of his players than Mickey. Better overall tactics. When IU gets into a rut, changes are made to get them out of it (while Karachi often stagnates, relies on the one or two performers performing out of their mind, e.g. Bopara in the past, Afridi etc. And while I get the Pakistani T20 team is doing a great job, kind of feel it's mostly Sarfraz, especially seeing him succeed with Quetta.
Mickey has a poor test record, lost an SL series partly because he didn't pick a 2nd spinner in UAE. And he did the same mistake twice in a row.
Mickey is slow to introduce youngsters/new talent to the team. Took a long time to introduce Fakhar into the team. Took a long time to drop Azhar and Shehzad. Took a long time to introduce Haris into the ODI team.
Mickey has a Champions Trophy under his belt, which you can't take away from him.
Is it me though, but does Dean seem to work with our guys and local Pakistani talent better than Mickey. Of course Mickey is the more accomplished/experienced coach. While I was one who wanted Mickey over Dean Jones in the past citing Dean's inexperience, I feel like I'm kinda regretting it. Dean's doing a fantastic job with IU, and I wonder if he'd do a better job if given the job of Pakistani coach.