Brendon McCullum denies England drink an excessive amount of after Harry Brook revelation and boozy Noosa journey – as coach admits he may very well be changed after Ashes defeat

Brendon McCullum has admitted there may be ‘someone better’ for the job of England head coach – and denied his players drink too much, despite the revelation that white-ball captain Harry Brook was involved in a fracas outside a nightclub in New Zealand in October because the bouncer thought he was inebriated.

Speaking after his side had surrendered the Ashes 4–1, but before news broke of the Brook incident in Wellington, McCullum insisted: ‘Half our guys don’t have a drink, to be honest. They’ll have a couple of beers every now and again. I think people do that in most walks of life.’

Even so, McCullum and others in the dressing-room knew what had happened in New Zealand, leaving the ECB open to charges of a cover-up.

Not until the story broke soon after the end of the Sydney Test on Thursday did the news become public, well over two months after Brook reported himself to the management, earning the maximum possible fine of £30,000 and a warning about his future conduct.

ECB chiefs can hardly hold the incident against McCullum in retrospect, given that they also knew what had gone on, but it hasn’t helped his cause that public perception of a team already under scrutiny after their boozy trip to Noosa between the second and third Tests has taken another hit.

Nor has it increased his chances of staying in the job after next month’s T20 World Cup in India and Sri Lanka that ECB chairman Richard Thompson and chief executive Richard Gould have told him he has to change his methods if he wants to stay in the role.

Brendon McCullum admitted he could be replaced as England coach after their Ashes defeat

Harry Brook has apologised after being embroiled in an incident with a nightclub bouncer in New Zealand on the eve of captaining England in their third ODI there (pictured in October)

McCullum and others in the dressing-room knew what had happened in New Zealand, leaving the ECB open to charges of a cover-up

With a review of the series already underway, the two men are trying to steer a path between sweeping change and the status quo, with no change at all not an option.

But McCullum’s preference for doing things his way, and his natural suspicion of corporate interference, means his association with England, stretching back to May 2022, could reach a natural conclusion after the World Cup.

While refusing to divulge details of his meeting earlier this week in Sydney with Thompson and Gould, McCullum admitted: ‘Whatever you do in life, I think you have to have some authenticity. For me, as coach, when you’re trying to guide and shepherd and assist players, you need to have an influence over how the environment runs, and be in charge of a lot of the decisions that are made when the pressure’s on.

‘So as long as that remains, I’m open to progress, I’m open to evolution and some nipping and tucking. But without being ultimately able to steer the ship, maybe there is someone better.’

It is hard to see how McCullum’s desire not to ‘throw out all this work’ will tally with the ECB’s insistence on a tighter operation, both on the field, where England were ridiculed by Australian observers throughout the Ashes for their loose strokeplay, and off it, with a compliant dressing-room offering little by way of dissenting opinion.

The board may also take issue with McCullum’s claim that England have made ‘significant progress’ under his watch.

At the start, he was a breath of fresh air, presiding over 10 wins in his first 11 Tests, often in spectacular fashion. But results have tailed off, and four series against Australia and India – the yardstick by which England’s Test progress is best measured – have produced a pair of 2–2 draws at home and two 4–1 defeats away.

Despite that, McCullum insisted: ‘There has been some progress. You never want to throw out what’s worked. You just want to keep chiselling away at some areas which need improvement. So I’d be loath to want to rip the script up and try and rediscover a completely different method.’