ALAN BUTCHER

Marcus Hook: After spending a number of years in the wings, as it were, what's it like being the Surrey manager?

Alan Butcher: It's totally different. I would say one of the big differences is in the amount of one to one coaching that you do. I don't get the opportunity to do as much of that now, because there's so much else that goes with running the cricket club as opposed to improving cricketers. I actually spent some time with Mark earlier this morning and enjoyed that because I hadn't really done much of it. On the other side of that is that it's given me an opportunity to explore more of the psychological an ordinary man management side of things that I also enjoy, but was may be less important when I was second team coach.

MH: I guess the main difference is that you're in the results business now…

AB: When the first team role first came around it wasn't for me. I wasn't something that was a huge ambition, like a "must do" thing, when it was first mentioned. Because I was enjoying the role I had. Also, to be brutally honest, from a security point of view, it's one you can do for a long time. If you're producing players you can do it for a long time, whereas if it doesn't go right when you're manager you can be out of a job. But, as it developed over a period of time, I started to think I really fancy giving it a crack. I had a strong feeling that I knew what the issues were here, what the players needed to enable us to move forward. I never had any doubts that we had a good enough side. It was just getting a few issues out into the open, starting to clear a few minds and get people talking amongst each other. Fortunately, that all seemed to work very well last year.

MH: Looking at the squad, one expects Surrey to be competitive in the County Championship this year, but, perhaps, in one-day cricket there's room for improvement shall we say…

AB: I was really disappointed about the Pro40, because I thought we had played some very good cricket and we had dominated six of the other eight teams. We had a bad game at home to Gloucestershire and an inexplicable performance against Somerset at Taunton to follow a very good performance against Worcestershire the day before. On the last day we could have finished top of the division, but that's life. We are aware that our one-day cricket was disappointing, and it has been since I came back to Surrey in 1998. We can be brilliant. We can play sides off the park, but we can be abysmal as well. We're either up here or down there and we don't necessarily have a par performance. But one of the things I was pleased about, apart from being promoted in the championship, was the fact that we were still able to give young players an opportunity. Neil Saker bowled pretty well. His figures didn't look great, but he bowled on some flat wickets. He turned the game for us a Bath and he got some important wickets at home to Glamorgan.

MH: In terms of Surrey's one-day cricket, has the World Cup come at a good time? By that I mean have you pointed things out to the players based on the matches we've seen, like the way Sri Lanka have improved beyond all recognition as a fielding side?

AB: We've talked about our fielding in one-day cricket and it is something we need to do something about. It probably reflects on the age profile of the side. We're not as athletic as some sides in the field, so we have to be sure that everyone works hard and throw ourselves about as much as we possibly can. We've practised a bit, in terms of changing our throwing techniques while we were in Mumbai and the signs are that's improved the direct hit ratio. Mark was out there practising the other day and was hitting the wicket with one in two. In the past I reckon he was hitting with one in eight. Those sort of things could make a big difference. But I don't think it's any great secret that our number one priority last year was to get into the top division of the County Championship. I don't think it meant in any way that we didn't pay attention to our one-day cricket, because there's too much of it to give it away. We've always been competitive in Twenty20 cricket. I felt that we weren't too far away from good performances against Sussex and Somerset in the Cheltenham & Gloucester Trophy, but then we just got injuries. I also made a conscious decision leave Mark Ramprakash out of the early one-dayers, even though he's a very vital cog in our one-day side, because we needed him to be fresh for the championship games in June. We just had two off games in the Pro40 League. The two disappointing days were the Twenty20 Cup finals day and the last day of the season, in the Pro40 League at Taunton. As far as this year goes, the same thing applies. I would say the number one priority is to have a really good assault on the County Championship, which I think we're more than capable of mounting, and, from talking to the players their all really excited about the prospect of being back in the top division.

MH: For me, the side that I am really interested in are Sussex. If Saqlain Mushtaq's knees are up to playing regularly, perhaps they will be Surrey's biggest threat in the County Championship.

AB: I'm sure that when he bowls he'll still take wickets, but I think there are other issues there. I don't think it's good for English cricket to have a three-pronged overseas attack. As much as I love Saqlain - and a lot of the boys here said we should have signed him. I looked at the money situation, but I also looked at the moral side of it. I've got one spinner who's not going to play for England again in Ian Salisbury, although the form he was in last year he could have done. Nayan Doshi is in with a shout of playing for England, if he keeps developing; and there are a lot of people in India who will testify to the fact that what they've seen of Chris Schofield was far better than any of the spinners England sent there from the Academy. So, it might not be too late for him. I do believe we have a responsibility to develop England players. If a club of this size isn't going to do it, who is? But I've not said anything publicly because it's Saqlain.

MH: Just say, the first game of the season demands that Surrey field two spinners. Which two would they be?

AB: Looking at it with a couple of weeks to go, if we played two I would think that Doshi and Salisbury would be favourites. I would say that Schoey has a good opportunity of playing regularly in one-day cricket, but later in the season there's a distinct possibility that all three will play as they did last summer; especially at the Brit Oval, where a fourth seamer is often superfluous. It's better to have three blokes who can bowl a lot of overs and can get you wickets as well. They're all different, even though they spin the ball in the same direction; which is why I was never concerned about playing Anil Kumble and Ian Salisbury last year, because they are totally different bowlers. This year the same thing will apply, except one of them hasn't got 500 Test wickets.

MH: If I can be honest with you I think there are two players against whom there's a bit of a question mark. Having said that, if they have big seasons then I think Surrey will take some stopping. The two guys I have in mind are Jimmy Ormond and Rikki Clarke.

AB: They're certainly going to be vital. The way Jimmy has been bowling in the nets and in Mumbai, he's looking as if he's going to be a handful. It will be like having an entirely new bowler. That's exciting, but he's not played regularly and it's nearly two years since he's been fully fit. He's still feeling his way, though he looks much more confident and in good shape. He feels better about himself because he's fitter. I would say, with Rikki, that if he gets 35 championship wickets in addition to 900 or a thousand runs that he can expect to get, then that will make us very competitive. It's interesting because for the balance of the side and for us to make a challenge in the County Championship, you could almost argue that Rikki's bowling is more important to us than his batting, because I feel we could replace the runs, but no-one else would give us the wickets.

MH: Last season ended at just the wrong time for the skipper. He made back to back hundreds against Glamorgan. Then, in the last two matches, made three fifties, two of which were unbeaten. If he picks up where he left off we will be competitive, assuming Mark Ramprakash is good for another 1,500-run championship season.

AB: Mark batted very well towards the end of last season. I would say you've got JB and Scotty to give us a start, then you've got a middle order from numbers three to seven, so you'd be disappointed if, over the course of sixteen matches, you did have enough runs to be competitive.

MH: So how has pre-season gone?

AB: I was more concerned about this pre-season than I was before last year's pre-season. That's because last season I was absolutely convinced that I knew what needed to be done. I had it worked out in my head long before the season started and how I was going to go about it. This year, the situation had changed completely. The easy thing to do would have been to do more of the same, but I thought it was important that we didn't keep going over the same ground all the time, but let it go. So, we've had less meetings and less talking and to replace that we've improved the way the fitness side of things was organised. It has been good to have Matt Church on board to run the training, which has freed up Dale Naylor for the more intensive rehab. We've also spent a lot of time on visual skills. We killed the guys running up the banks at Whitgift School, where there's some nice hills. We had a day with Fulham where the lads were given football skill drills and training. So, it was a varied programme followed by a week out in Mumbai. The facilities there are very good. There's no shortage of young kids willing to run up and bowl to you. It's just a good place for cricket. I think a lot of the guys, when they went there for the first time last year, were a bit unsure about it, but they got a bit more involved this year. It's one of those places where you've got to take to the culture to get the most out of it.

MH: Finally, do you feel, like me, that the fixture list for this season doesn't do Surrey many favours, with so many of the early games being at the Oval?

AB: I agree, but because we tend to have international cricket late in the season - Bill Gordon, our groundsman, needs a week or two before the Test match to prepare everything - plus there's the timing of Guildford and the Twenty20 Cup to take into account, perhaps it's not so surprising. But it's not ideal because they're such good pitches at the Brit Oval. There's not much pace or bounce and the ball doesn't tend to zip around. If they can get it to bounce enough then good bowlers feel they are in with a shout. Actually, I was talking to Steve Magoffin, who played a second team game for us, here last year. He said he quite enjoyed bowling at the Oval because it had decent bounce and decent carry, and that was in May. So hopefully he'll hit the wicket hard come the start of the season. He got thirty-odd wickets in the Pura Cup this winter, which is no mean feat bowling at Perth, which has really flattened out, as we all saw during the Ashes. Career-wise, I think he goes at 2.7 runs per over, and that's the sort of control that'll be really handy for us. He arrives on 9 April and will probably be with us until the middle of May, depending on how long Matt Nicholson's twins - who were born prematurely - need to stay in hospital for.

APRIL 2007