• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Best Captain over the past since 1990

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
I saw Taylor has a captain in the 97 & 98 Ashes series respectively, and i thought he was pretty good. I saw steve waugh in evry single one of his test has captain except the 3 in sri lanka in 99 and i thought Waugh was excellent throughout his career and from seeing all of those matches i am inclined to rate him higher has a skipper than Fleming but not by much
 

C_C

International Captain
Australia from the late 80s to present day have followed a template set by the West Indies of the mid 70s to early 90s pretty well in regards to captaincy and team building.

WI had Lloyd, who was an extremely good captain that started out with a decent team and turned it to a great one before retiring.
Taylor is pretty much in the same capacity, though Australia was on the verge of greatness when Taylor departed.
Then came Viv Richards and Steve Waugh - two hall of famer batsmen that took over when the stage was set and vaulted the team to even higher levels. This is a bit more pronounced under Tugga than Viv ( who's initial captaincy gains were offset a bit by the time the 90s rolled around).
Both Viv and Tugga were decent captains, while both Taylor and Lloyd were awesome captains.
One advantage Lloyd had was being the father figure of the team once Kanhai retired - he was older than everybody else by atleast 5-6 years and that helped his cause immensely.

So far it has been similar curves.....the interesting part would be if OZ can stop a 'windies-esque' trail towards the bottom once Gilly,Hayden,Langer,McGrath and Warne retires.......given their age, i wouldnt be surprised it that entire quintet called quits within the space of one or two years.
 
Last edited:

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
S. Waugh's weakness was that he didn't really bother with 1st to 3rd gear, he wanted to get into 5th straight away. Sometimes his lack of willingness to head back into second for a sharp right-hander got him in trouble...and he'd try to restart the car still in 5th.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
vic_orthdox said:
S. Waugh's weakness was that he didn't really bother with 1st to 3rd gear, he wanted to get into 5th straight away. Sometimes his lack of willingness to head back into second for a sharp right-hander got him in trouble...and he'd try to restart the car still in 5th.
I'd agree with that. Waugh is without question one of the most aggressive captains in cricket history (not that Viv was far behind - more parallels there), and there were times when his aggression got his team in a touch of strife. Sometimes their amazing talent was enough to dig them out of the hole, and sometimes it was not. The fact that he has the best win-loss ratio of any captain ever suggests that it paid off most of the time, of course.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
C_C said:
So far it has been similar curves.....the interesting part would be if OZ can stop a 'windies-esque' trail towards the bottom once Gilly,Hayden,Langer,McGrath and Warne retires.......given their age, i wouldnt be surprised it that entire quintet called quits within the space of one or two years.
I don't think Australia will drop in anything like the way the West Indies did. The Windies began to decline slightly in the later part of the 80s, and in the early 90s were slipping, but the emergence of players like Ambrose and Lara kept them afloat until the mid 90s. People think of it as "75-95 dominance", but the West Indies went within a whisker of losing that epic series in 92/93 (one run from losing it, in fact), and certainly they would have been on shaky ground as a side by that time if it were not for one or two big names who came though. As time went by, the brittle nature of West Indies cricket aside from those few players became exposed, and I don't think Australia has that brittle background. Australia has a much more solid foundation of young players developing currently, and a much more stable domestic basis to remain competitive. The worst case scenario I can see for Australia in the post-2007 Ashes/WC era is a drop away from top spot to mid-pack, but they certainly won't be dismal failures at that time. More likely in my mind, and what I would predict to happen, is that after Australia lose at least McGrath, Warne and Gilly and probably another player or two (Martyn, Hayden, Langer, Kasprowicz are all getting on a bit) their hold on top spot will losen, but they will maintain it for a few more years in a similar fashion to what the Windies did after they started to decline. There's no evidence that Australia are slumping yet (and no, losing to Somerset is not evidence of such), so I'd expect Australia to remain number one until at least 2 or 3 years after the 2007 WC, and if their domestic talent lives up to potential they could well continue to dominate for some time.

I expect England to take a firm grip on second spot for an extended period like South Africa did in the late 90s, and take over if Australia do slip.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
When it comes to playing captain's knock when your team needs it, I haven't seen anything better than the 99 WI Vs Aus series, when Lara made those magnificient runs under the greatest pressure I have seen ever on a player.
 

deeps

International 12th Man
FaaipDeOiad said:
Neither do I. Waugh was a good captain certainly, and in the same sort of league as Fleming and company, but he wasn't in the same league as Taylor, and Border was better as well.
as i said, it's not purely the best captain...their performance as a player, and ability to use those capabilites to lead the team from the front also come into play.

I have no doubt that Taylor was a brilliant captain, but he wasn't known for his "captains" knocks etc.
 

Swervy

International Captain
deeps said:
as i said, it's not purely the best captain...their performance as a player, and ability to use those capabilites to lead the team from the front also come into play.

I have no doubt that Taylor was a brilliant captain, but he wasn't known for his "captains" knocks etc.

well how do explain the respect and admiration Mike Brearley received for his captaincy when he was nowhere near a batsman of test standard.

If making judgements about a captains abilities as a captain, why should his ability to bat well come into it
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
deeps said:
as i said, it's not purely the best captain...their performance as a player, and ability to use those capabilites to lead the team from the front also come into play.

I have no doubt that Taylor was a brilliant captain, but he wasn't known for his "captains" knocks etc.
He certainly played his fair share of them. Not as many as Waugh of course, as Waugh was a much better batsman, but that can't be the only criteria or Brian Lara would be the best captain in the world today.
 

C_C

International Captain
As Swervy said- and i agree with him - when evaluating a captain, his cricketing skills are irrelevant.
You could be bradman incarnate and average 99 with the bat but be the most dense captain ever to grace the field in terms of captaincy decision-making.
 

deeps

International 12th Man
FaaipDeOiad said:
He certainly played his fair share of them. Not as many as Waugh of course, as Waugh was a much better batsman, but that can't be the only criteria or Brian Lara would be the best captain in the world today.

it's like a fine balance, between being a good captain, and being a good batsman/ bowler


So say, give a player a mark out of 10.. 50% of those marks are for cricketing prowess alone, and the remaining 50% goes to captaincy

BCL at the moment, would get 5 for his cricketing prowess, but would only get near 2.5 for his Captaincy, resulting in a total of 7.5 points

SRW would get 5 for his cricketing prowess as well, but would get 4 for his captaincy, resulting in a total of 9 points.

So judging by the above criterea, SRW is the better captain.

Sure, cricketing ability has nothing to do with captaincy, but in this situation, it must be considered because that's the question at hand

and Mark taylor, would get 5 for his captaincy, and 3.5 for his cricketing ability whilst captain, resulting in a total of 8.5

so by that measurement

SRW>MT>BCL as a captain+player
 

Top