MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT
Poorly managed Birmingham Phoenix speaks to wider issues at Edgbaston
GEORGE DOBELL: The Birmingham teams have managed just two wins between them in this season's Hundred, and their absolutely dreadful performances could impact Warwickshire as well
You can understand why the social media accounts linked to Birmingham Phoenix tend to focus on off-field events.
Clearly, having Jude Bellingham involved is terrific. And that crowd catch - the one-handed take, the nonchalant return - really might have been the most memorable moment of cricket produced by anyone Birmingham-related in the tournament.
But results on the pitch have been - and let's be kind here - dreadful. Absolutely dreadful.
If that sounds harsh, take a look at the tables. The Birmingham teams are bottom of both the men's and women's competitions. They've won two of their 11 completed games (with one women's match abandoned) at the time of writing. Some of the margins of defeat (such as nine wickets with 69 balls unused in the women's home match against Trent Rockets or 87 runs in the men's game in Manchester) have been painfully vast.
The men's side were, perhaps, unfortunate to lose Mustafizur Rahman and Jacob Bethell. But other sides suffered withdrawals, too. Plans have to be robust enough to adapt.
Some Warwickshire supporters - the sort who are spending the month watching the One Day Cup at Rugby School and Nettleworth, you suspect - may not much care about any of this. They may even admit to a hint of schadenfreude.
But that's misplaced. For what's gone on with Phoenix will have a knock-on effect on Warwickshire's other teams. And points to deeper issues lying within not just the franchise team but the club as a whole.
Because what the last few weeks have exposed is the limitations in the cricket management at Birmingham and Warwickshire. And those limitations are a concern to every team they put out in every competition.
Consider, for example, Phoenix's recruitment strategy. The competition offered an opportunity to build a brand championing local talent and boost a sense of belonging within the Warwickshire squads at the same time. With a bit of thought, teams could have been built which truly represented the communities from which the spectators come and also consolidated the club and franchise culture.
It's probably understandable that a selection team, dazzled by all the talent that was available at auction, could be seduced into making other choices. But it was a mistake.
For what are those Warwickshire players to make of their own club's apparent ambivalence towards their services? What are the likes of Chris Woakes, Dan Mousley, Sam Hain and Issy Wong to make of the likes of Matt Montgomery and Joe Weatherley being signed ahead of them?
Maybe, in some cases, you could argue that Warwickshire were simply the victims of the auction process. They may have wanted Mousley and co, but others bid for them first.
But Waokes was retained by Welsh Fire, and Hain wasn't picked up by anyone. That's Hain, who has scored more than twice the number of T20 runs for Warwickshire (or Birmingham) than anyone else. He was easily the team's highest England-qualified run-scorer in the Blast and remains a key player for the club in all formats.
On a level, won't he now feel the club's management didn't back him when they had the opportunity? There's no Warwickshire core to either squad and, perhaps as a consequence, little team spirit and little identity. It is, painfully obviously, just some players brought together for a couple of weeks.
There has been other clumsy man management. A couple of years ago, Moeen Ali, who until the blooming of Bellingham, might have been Birmingham's most recognisable global sports star, volunteered to move to a lower pay grade in order to ensure the team were able to sign Liam Livingstone.
A year or two later, when the pay bands increased, he suggested that loyalty should be reciprocated. It wasn't, and Birmingham went into this season without either Moeen or Livingstone, who was made an offer well below market rate. That's two leaders lost from the dressing room in a stroke. It's perhaps not entirely a coincidence they have played such timid cricket.
Instead, Phoenix used a pre-auction pick to secure Mitch Owen. Owen averaged 15.09 in the BBL over the winter and 14.57 in his most recent PSL season (2025). He's never scored a run in the IPL - and he has batted - and he averages below five in the SA20. So nobody should be massively surprised that he is averaging nine in this year's Hundred. Signing him pre-auction is like winning a supermarket sweep and leaving with a banana.
The thing is, Warwickshire - and yes, we are conflating Birmingham and Warwickshire a bit here - sacked a World Cup-winning coach not so long ago (Mark Robinson) as they were sick of being knocked out at the quarter-final stages of the T20 Blast. Well, they've sure put an end to that. But not, you suspect, in the way they intended. They didn't qualify for the knock-out stages of the Blast, and they won't qualify for the knockout stages of The Hundred.
They all sacked (just a few days before Christmas, it might be noted) Tony Frost, who had served for years on the ground staff, coaching staff and playing staff. And if you make these ruthless decisions, you are going to be expected to justify them with sharp improvement on the pitch.
There's not much evidence of that, is there? The men's team have impressed at times in the Championship. But both men's and women's teams have failed in limited-overs cricket, and there are whispers that, if they don't enjoy a strong end to the Championship season, Ian Westwood (Warwickshire men's head coach) could pay the price. As one of the few involved with experience of playing professional cricket, and one of even fewer who has a link to the great teams of the past, that would seem most unwise.
The management of the women's team has been particularly alarming. In recent days, Warwickshire have lost Georgia Davis, their captain, having already seen Em Arlott - who might be their leading seamer - go. These are, at domestic level, top players. And hugely positive figures in any dressing room.
That's a shame, you may conclude. But player retention is a competitive business. Maybe they received better offers.
But you could make a decent case to argue that both players left due to neglect. In Arlott's case, the neglect was failing to start contract conversations when other clubs were courting her and in Davis' case, the neglect was in failing to resolve matters which were causing her concern.
In particular, it is understood that Davis - who was the team's captain, remember - was concerned by a lack of second XI cricket and the lack of a strength and conditioning coach throughout the winter. These are, in short, exactly the sort of things you would want your club captain to push for.
But when Davis said she wanted assurances about them before signing a new contract, it is understood her contract offer was withdrawn.
These departures sustain a worrying pattern for Warwickshire's women. In recent years, they have lost something approaching an England A team to other counties: Amy Jones; Eve Jones; Marie Kelly; Sarah Glenn; Grace Potts among many, many others. They've now even lost Bryony Gillgrass, who has played for Eng Under-19 from their academy to Essex.
As a result, panicked offers have been made to others to stay with the club. Some of those who remain are now rumoured to be earning something approaching double the top-paid players in other teams.
There are similar questions to be asked about the Hundred side. Why, for example, was Emma Lamb, who was the side's top England-qualified run-scorer in 2025, not selected until the fifth game of this Hundred campaign? She has responded by top-scoring in both games since she was recalled. But it's all been too late.
This is simply poor management.
And who is the management? Well, there were eyebrows raised when James Thomas was appointed as performance director a couple of years ago. While Thomas has a decent CV - he came from Man City and has enjoyed success in various Olympic sports - he didn't have any background in cricket. And, right now, you wonder if that's beginning to show.
As a result, he has a reputation for delegating many decisions. But that does rather raise the question: what does he do? And who at board and executive level thought appointing a man with little cricket knowledge to preside over several cricket teams was a good idea? Forget poor Ian Westwood. It's these people who should be considering their position.
For there's very little knowledge of professional cricket on the board. There's very little in the executive team. To have appointed a performance director who also has very little knowledge of professional cricket feels like a major misjudgement.
You're wondering why Phoenix - or Warwickshire - haven't had a chance to explain themselves here, aren't you? Well, of course they were offered one.
But sadly, despite producing a press release claiming they are "championing new voices within cricket media", they declined to answer questions about their Hundred campaign. When they do so, they will be given every opportunity to explain their choices.
Warwickshire have done lots of good things in recent times. Their non-cricket business is thriving. The stadium is improving all the time. Their reaction to the inclusion crisis of recent years has been exemplary. These things really matter.
But they are a cricket club. And these results are unacceptably poor. They really do need to look again at this part of their operation.