The Great Captains

[wpdavid]

Worrall > Lloyd imo.

Lloyd does piss me off a bit when he talks up his own record as if the WI had never been successful before and, lets be honest, it isn't so hard to win when you have the level of fire power that he did.

 

[fredfertang]

Would love it if this turns out to be a massive troll and after days and a dozen pages of discussion the number 1 ends up being Steve Smith or Ganguly or someone equally horrendous

Good point - the use of the underscore in the username is suggestive of GI Joe being behind all this

 

[AndrewB]

I think Vaughan's man management was also excellent and, as you say, his tactical nous was great. In terms of adding value, he led a team of good players, but not many who could honestly be described as great players, to some of the most famous wins I our life times. On the down side, his final couple of years weren't great tbf.

Strauss, as you said, inherited the fall-out from KP's brief reign and, in terms of adding value, achieved masses. Very good man management, and tactically sound, without being (or needing to be) particularly innovative. Again, loses some credit for not stamping out the cliques and divisions that marred his final few months in charge.

Brearley's man-management and tactical excellence were beyond question, but he was a very lucky captain in terms of timing. Inherited a side that was already improving under Greig, and then got Botham's best years.

So basically similar to Vaughan, who inherited a side already improving under Hussain, and then got Flintoff's best years...

Obviously, even those who think that Brearley got as much out of Botham and Willis as any captain could have in 1981 have to admit that he was very lucky that things went quite the way they did... but then, if you change the outcome of *one delivery* at Edgbaston in 2005, Vaughan goes from "the hero who ended the run of 8 Ashes defeats" to "the guy in charge of the best England team for decades who had the Aussies where he wanted them (100 behind with 2 wickets left on a difficult pitch) and then choked".

Are there actually any successful captains who you couldn't point at and say "yeah, but they were lucky - had a great side to lead"? Chappelli's side drew with England and NZ - and then he had Lillee and Thomson and they sailed through the Ashes (and without L&T in the 6th Test they got thumped). Border's side struggled horribly for 4 years - but by then they'd found some decent players, and they started beating everyone - except when they played the West Indies, who had even decenter players. WI struggled for a bit under Clive Lloyd - then they found Greenidge, Richards, Holding, Roberts and Garner and suddenly he's a great captain...

 

[wpdavid]

So basically similar to Vaughan, who inherited a side already improving under Hussain, and then got Flintoff's best years...

Obviously, even those who think that Brearley got as much out of Botham and Willis as any captain could have in 1981 have to admit that he was very lucky that things went quite the way they did... but then, if you change the outcome of *one delivery* at Edgbaston in 2005, Vaughan goes from "the hero who ended the run of 8 Ashes defeats" to "the guy in charge of the best England team for decades who had the Aussies where he wanted them (100 behind with 2 wickets left on a difficult pitch) and then choked".

Are there actually any successful captains who you couldn't point at and say "yeah, but they were lucky - had a great side to lead"? Chappelli's side drew with England and NZ - and then he had Lillee and Thomson and they sailed through the Ashes (and without L&T in the 6th Test they got thumped). Border's side struggled horribly for 4 years - but by then they'd found some decent players, and they started beating everyone - except when they played the West Indies, who had even decenter players. WI struggled for a bit under Clive Lloyd - then they found Greenidge, Richards, Holding, Roberts and Garner and suddenly he's a great captain...

Were England still improving under Hussain before Vaughan took over? The impressive wins in Pakistan and SL had been a couple of years earlier, since when the side had pretty much stalled for a year or so. Your point about that one delivery at Edgbaston 2005 changing everything is absolutely true, but there is also a bigger picture that covers the whole period leading up to and including that series.

I agree with your broader point though, and I've more than once suggested that Lloyd's captaincy is over-rated. It comes down to some perception of adding value, doesn't it, and I think we both know that isn't an exact science. I'm looking for someone who managed to get more than the sum of the parts out of the players at his disposal, which I think is true of both Vaughan and Strauss, even allowing for one or two key moments that could have gone either way. Both of them won ashes series against Aus sides that were probably stronger than England, man-for-man (for Strauss I'm talking about 2009, not 2010/11), and that's about as much as I could ask of any England captain.

So elsewhere I'm looking at Benaud and Border. Imran too, if only for leading the only side to regularly give WI a run for their money in the 1980s.
Maybe Geoff Howarth who oversaw the improvement in NZ, which wasn't just because Hadlee emerged as an ATG.
Worrall for all sorts of reasons that probably have to go beyond the usual cricketing ones.
Maybe Graeme Smith for actually leading an SA side to beat Aus. I would imagine there were all sorts of psychological barriers there, not dissimilar to what Vaughan's England had to overcome in 2005.
Misbah and Ranatunga have to be good shouts.

 

[Midwinter]

Yeah, I couldn't think of anyone else to replace him, but selectors and journalists aren't always logical.

There wasn't the 24hour/7day a week barrage of twitterage by boofheads making stuff up back then.

Everyone could see Border was the only bloke certain of being selected in the next test, which made him the only sensible choice for captain.

 

[mr_mister]

don't drag this out forever

you've worked on it for a year? then just post the list we can discuss it later

 

[harsh.ag]

As captain, Lloyd has less firepower than Viv did at his disposal. Lloyd did get the best years of Viv as a batsman, however.

WI batting during Lloyd > WI batting during Viv
WI bowling during Lloyd < WI bowling during Viv

 

[wpdavid]

As captain, Lloyd has less firepower than Viv did at his disposal. Lloyd did get the best years of Viv as a batsman, however.

WI batting during Lloyd > WI batting during Viv
WI bowling during Lloyd < WI bowling during Viv

Agree about the batting.

Bowling's a tough call.
Lloyd had peak years of Roberts, Holding, Garner and Croft, plus the first few years of Marshall. I know he didn't always have four of those at his disposal, but when he did ....
Richards had last year or so of Holding & Garner, peak years of Marshall and early years of Ambrose and Walsh. Perhaps Richardson had the best of Ambrose. Plus Richards had Patterson, although he wasn't often as lethal as his first series against England. From memory, Richards had more cases of 2nd string WI quicks like the Benjamins than Lloyd ever did, but I wouldn't swear to that.
It will probably transpire that I've forgotten someone obvious.

 

[harsh.ag]

Agree about the batting.

Bowling's a tough call.
Lloyd had peak years of Roberts, Holding, Garner and Croft, plus the first few years of Marshall. I know he didn't always have four of those at his disposal, but when he did ....
Richards had last year or so of Holding & Garner, peak years of Marshall and early years of Ambrose and Walsh. Perhaps Richardson had the best of Ambrose. Plus Richards had Patterson, although he wasn't often as lethal as his first series against England. From memory, Richards had more cases of 2nd string WI quicks like the Benjamins than Lloyd ever did, but I wouldn't swear to that.
It will probably transpire that I've forgotten someone obvious.

Yeah you're right, but for the first few years, Lloyd had to do with an average bowling attack, from 74-78 around. Then it got real pretty quick. Viv never had to deal with that. Hence, what I wrote.

 

[honestbharani]

Were England still improving under Hussain before Vaughan took over? The impressive wins in Pakistan and SL had been a couple of years earlier, since when the side had pretty much stalled for a year or so. Your point about that one delivery at Edgbaston 2005 changing everything is absolutely true, but there is also a bigger picture that covers the whole period leading up to and including that series.

I agree with your broader point though, and I've more than once suggested that Lloyd's captaincy is over-rated. It comes down to some perception of adding value, doesn't it, and I think we both know that isn't an exact science. I'm looking for someone who managed to get more than the sum of the parts out of the players at his disposal, which I think is true of both Vaughan and Strauss, even allowing for one or two key moments that could have gone either way. Both of them won ashes series against Aus sides that were probably stronger than England, man-for-man (for Strauss I'm talking about 2009, not 2010/11), and that's about as much as I could ask of any England captain.

So elsewhere I'm looking at Benaud and Border. Imran too, if only for leading the only side to regularly give WI a run for their money in the 1980s.
Maybe Geoff Howarth who oversaw the improvement in NZ, which wasn't just because Hadlee emerged as an ATG.
Worrall for all sorts of reasons that probably have to go beyond the usual cricketing ones.
Maybe Graeme Smith for actually leading an SA side to beat Aus. I would imagine there were all sorts of psychological barriers there, not dissimilar to what Vaughan's England had to overcome in 2005.
Misbah and Ranatunga have to be good shouts.

Agree with all of this. Good post and points, David.


And FWIW, this is why I think its easier to rank captains of each team instead of doing it overall. The very nature of the job is so much of management of both men and boards and committees and rules and stuff... It is just hard to rationalize it to any sort of acceptable degree across teams. Within teams, at least I feel it would be worth the effort.

 

[listento_me]

Graeme Smith​

​

“Smith's leadership and his batting are all about being direct and upfront. The subtleties of captaincy have grown into his game, but he is still at his most comfortable surging once more unto the breach…”​

Telford Vice​

Graeme Craig Smith is a colossus of South African cricket, both physically and in terms of his impact on cricket in a nation mired in political and sporting controversy. He would stride out to the crease, to take the first blows for South Africa and to be the first to push back. Would it be far-fetched to label Smith as the single most important figure in that nation’s cricketing history? I don’t think so. Opening batsman, tactical leader and spiritual saviour. The young Smith, just turned 22, was handed the most important job in sport – to captain one’s country – at a time when South Africa was still recovering from both the corruption of the Cronje era and era and the restrained, almost apathetic nature of Pollock’s well balanced, if limited captaincy.

That is a lot for anyone to contend with, it must have been even more daunting for a sportsman who was so young, in years and in terms of experience. He did not let it daunt him too much and in his first series in charge, South Africa would thrash Bangladesh and upon arrival in England, the team would come together to not only draw the series but to win by impressive margins when they had to. It helped that Smith himself hit two typically muscular double centuries. He had arrived both as a tactical force and a physical threat.

The jewel in Graeme Smith’s crown would be two-fold: one, his test victory over Australia, in Australia and second, South Africa’s unbeaten run of 14 test series. First, the victory over Australia and the thrilling cricket that Smith’s South Africa played. They were very much built as a team by Smith. There was the mixture of the old and the new, the subtle and the outrageous and the combination was world class. Smith had, through inheritance and his own personal perseverance, crafted a team of world class fast bowlers and aggressive, truly upper tier batsmen. Just to prove it wasn’t a fluke, they would pull the trick yet again in 2012.

Then comes that unbeaten streak, the joint third highest in all of cricket. The most important factor was likely South Africa’s ability to avoid defeat, if not outright win, away from home. Half the series were away, with four of them resulting in wins. The best of the lot was likely the route of test number ones England in 2012. Smith’s South Africans were so dominant, they barely put a foot wrong. To take what is essentially test cricket’s world title, from the champions, in their backyard and to do it with relative comfort is one of the great achievements. If only Smith had not declared too late in the UAE, they would also hold an away win against a resurgent Pakistan.

As is often the case with greatness, it would slowly fade away, with losses against the old rival Australia. Then there is the world cup issue and that most emotive of words: choke. Smith could not change it, no matter how hard he tried. His team, so carefully crafted, so strong and fast and agile could not help but choke. They did it again and again and again and it denied him the international glory that the next three captains on this list all obtained. But following his retirement, South Africa are still in a good place and the backbone of his team, which he helped put together, is still going strong if a bit slower than normal.

Smith saw two transitions for South Africa and was instrumental in both of them: from Cronje to success and from the loss of the old guard to the emergence of a new, youthful team. That assures his place as one of the true greats in cricket’s captaining history.

Tests Captained 109 ODIs 150
Won 53 92
Lost 29 51
Draw/Tie 29 7​

 

[listento_me]

Is the right place to suggest that Strauss and Vaughan were both better England captains than Brearley?

imo, Strauss is the best England captain I have seen in my lifetime

 

[vcs]

Good post. But I can't remember when a conservative declaration cost them a win in UAE. Both games were comfortably drawn in 2010 IIRC and in 2013, the series ended 1-1.

 

[wpdavid]

imo, Strauss is the best England captain I have seen in my lifetime

How far back are you going?

 

[listento_me]

Good post. But I can't remember when a conservative declaration cost them a win in UAE. Both games were comfortably drawn in 2010 IIRC and in 2013, the series ended 1-1.

The first test of the 2010 series and the only reason it was a comfortable draw was because SA insisted on going for a lead of 450, even though they had Pakistan 132 runs behind already. They batted too long to eliminate risk, when a declaration at a lead of 350 would have given a better drive at Pakistan to chase the match and for SA, who looked the better side tbh, to go and win the match. It was unlike what Smith had done against other opponents, which is why I mentioned it. 450 is just way too much tbh.

 

[listento_me]

How far back are you going?

Captains I remember well are Hussain, Vaughn, Strauss and obviously Cook. I vaguely remember some of Atherton's time.

 

[Howe_zat]

This thread was quite good for a bit

 

[indiaholic]

The ban only applies to the podcast..

 

[Furball]

If you could genetically engineer someone to have Michael Clarke's tactical nous and Ricky Ponting's man management skills I reckon you'd have the best captain ever.

 

[smash84]

If you could genetically engineer someone to have Michael Clarke's tactical nous and Ricky Ponting's man management skills I reckon you'd have the best captain ever.

Ian chappell