Best current international captain

[C_C]

How exactly is it BS if you have to deal with several players from different cultures, language and religion ?

As per Zimbabwe- NO, its NOT the only team where politics play a part in team selections.
South Africa is one.
India is another.
Pakistan probably is the most politicised cricket team. Have you noticed how Bazid Khan came into the picture when the new cheif of PAK cricket is a personal friend of Majid Khan's ?(bazid's father). Have you noticed how that utterly incompetent general's son got to play international cricket straight outta club cricket coz his dad is the cricket supremo ?

Look- i come from an indian background and i have extensive family foundations in India but i've grown up mostly in the west - i think its fairly reasonable to say that i have the insight to both the worlds.

 

[C_C]

To be fair, South Africa and Zimbabwe have had their own fractious and divisive extra stuff to deal with.

quiete correct and my last post reflects this.
Another reason not to be a raving insomniac posting at 4am in the morning.

 

[King_Ponting]

But what the f*ck has that got to do with captaincy?

 

[C_C]

But what the f*ck has that got to do with captaincy?

Umm. The FIRST and FOREMOST job of a captain is to ensure team unity and harmony.
Unless you have that, rest everything is moot- for rivalries, clashes and misunderstandings will certainly ruin any 'on field expertise' you have.
In Australia/England/NZ you have to deal with that to a negligible degree- the team is mostly one monolithic bloc with very little differences in perspectives, cultures and linguistics.
A bloke from Perth is far more 'in zone' with a bloke from Sydney compared to a bloke from Punjab and a bloke from Tamil Nadu. There is considerable tolerance in India towards different cultures on a societerial level but on a personal level, there is considerable scope for misunderstandings and clashes as well.

Don't you think its much harder to accomplish that when you have players from several regions, cultures and religions forming the team than one essentially monolithic block ?

If you had 3 players from france, 2 from Germany, 2 from Russia, 2 from England 1 from Ireland and 1 from Greece, dont you think it makes your job to ensure team unity and harmony exponentially harder than dealing with 11 germans/russians/english/greeks,etc. ?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

He rebuilt that and India's performance (even though i dont agree with performance being an indicator of captaincy skills, i bring it up because you are factually wrong) under him is a lot better before him.

Perhaps "nowhere but backwards" was a tad harsh, but the fact is India had the capability to challenge Australia and push to be a clear number two in the world after their 2001 win, and didn't even come close and in fact fell away from the pack. India have hovered in mid-table mediocrity in test cricket and worse in one-day cricket throughout Ganguly's tenure, and the steps that were made early and looked so promising ended up nowhere. As much as you can't judge a captain by results alone, Ganguly DID have the talent to work with and still couldn't bring through results.

The best captains bring the best out of their players, lead from the front especially in the trickiest situations with the bat, AND get results or at the very least some improvement. Look at Ian Chappell... he took over a team in decline and disarray after Lawry's shoddy leadership and the absolute drubbing they took in 69/70 at the hands of South Africa, several retirements and so on. In his first series in charge he held a very good England side to four draws in an Ashes series, in his next series Australia drew 2-2 with the same opposition, and the next Australian series lost was 5 years later when Greg Chappell was in charge.

He had talent to work with, but it was underutilised and he blooded more of it. Ganguly should have achieved similar (although obviously not quite as exceptional) results for India, and couldn't do that.

As per India's shocking record away from home, it has improved under ganguly but i think you will find that the root cause of it is India's bowling overseas, which is lacklusture.

Of course, but the point is that it hasn't improved.

His field placements and bowling changes are pretty much the same callibre as everyone else's barring Fleming and his off field handling of personalities, supporting his players and bringing team unity is quiete frankly, peerless.

I'd say Vaughan and Ponting match him respectively on those two criteria, and both vastly outstrip him on results and general team improvement.

A captain doesnt have to lead from the front with the bat- his captaincy accumen and off field handling of matters is more than enough. Look at Mark Taylor, Ranatunga,Brearley etc.
Neither one of them were the best batsmen in their team.

No, they weren't, but Ranataunga and Taylor were far from liabilities - Ranatunga was one of the best batsmen in his team at ODI level and wasn't that bad at test level, Taylor was decent enough despite his technical flaws and is as hard working as any batsman you will ever see, and when the chips were down he stood up and led from the front. Brearley was a liability with the bat unfortunately, and that will taint his reputation as a captain somewhat. A captain doesn't have to be the best player, but they have to be reliable when it's needed and not make the team weaker with their presence.

Anyway, Ganguly isn't that bad with the bat, he's more in the Ranatunga mould of being decent but nothing special most of the time, but his play under pressure leaves a lot to be desired, which is where Ranatunga and especially Taylor were much better.

 

[King_Ponting]

Yes but that doesnt make him a better captain as he does not accomplish this by himself. The help of the team as a unite to try and perform in conjunction with other members in the team for the good of the team. That is more to do with the coaching of the team rather than the captain as most of the team bonding is done outside of the cricket field, during training etc. I think if u included that into the reckoning when assessing who is a better captain, it gives the idian captain an unfair advantage just because india is more multiculturally diverse than australia. It is the ability of the team to work as a unit rather than the captain who makes the team work as a unit. the captain is really only the leader of that unit and as such has control and power of that team.

 

[Adamc]

No, they weren't, but Ranataunga and Taylor were far from liabilities - Ranatunga was one of the best batsmen in his team at ODI level and wasn't that bad at test level, Taylor was decent enough despite his technical flaws and is as hard working as any batsman you will ever see, and when the chips were down he stood up and led from the front. Brearley was a liability with the bat unfortunately, and that will taint his reputation as a captain somewhat. A captain doesn't have to be the best player, but they have to be reliable when it's needed and not make the team weaker with their presence.

Anyway, Ganguly isn't that bad with the bat, he's more in the Ranatunga mould of being decent but nothing special most of the time, but his play under pressure leaves a lot to be desired, which is where Ranatunga and especially Taylor were much better.

Taylor was a fantastic batsman IMO; I guess what C_C is referring to is the 21-innings slump, in which he was in the side purely on account of his captaincy (and rightly so, IMO). Ironically, Australia lost the match in which he returned to form.

 

[C_C]

Of course, but the point is that it hasn't improved.

Umm... if the bowlers are incapable of producing goods consistently overseas,how can you get more outta them. Thats like trying to turn a chevvy into a merc....

The best captains bring the best out of their players, lead from the front especially in the trickiest situations with the bat, AND get results or at the very least some improvement.

And Ganguly did.
In his very first real series as captain(the two before were against bangladesh and zimbabwe),he beat the world champions in one of the biggest upsets in this millenia.
How exactly is that not 'chappell-esque' in its achievement ?
And i think its a bit narrowminded to think that a captain should lead from front especially in the trickiest situation with the bat- why bat ? why not ball ?
You are forgetting that one of the greatest captains in history of cricket -Imran Khan- was primarily a bowler.
And like i said, you cannot evaluate captaincy by achievements- its on field decisionmaking and off field management - thats all a captain can do really.
Results are far more dependent on the performance of the individuals that make up the team than on captaincy.

As for blooding talent/backing talent- c'mon mate, Ganguly is easily one of the best ever in that category.
Sehwag opening was his idea- he had to convince Wright on that.
He personally fought with the selectors to pick Bhajji for the australia series.
He personally asked the selectors to pick another opener so that VVS could bat in the middle order.
That is again, easily 'chappell-esque' category.

and both vastly outstrip him on results and general team improvement

A captain is not God- he isnt responsible for making the teammates improve and any claim to that is utter hogwash.
How YOU bat or bowl is in your control, not mine.
And as i explained earlier, results are extremely clouded way to judge a captain.

.

No, they weren't, but Ranataunga and Taylor were far from liabilities - Ranatunga was one of the best batsmen in his team at ODI level and wasn't that bad at test level, Taylor was decent enough despite his technical flaws and is as hard working as any batsman you will ever see, and when the chips were down he stood up and led from the front. Brearley was a liability with the bat unfortunately, and that will taint his reputation as a captain somewhat. A captain doesn't have to be the best player, but they have to be reliable when it's needed and not make the team weaker with their presence.

You realise that Ganguly is one of the alltime great ODI batsmen ?
Sure, he has had a rough year or two but it is stretching it when you say that he is a liability to the team.
Might i point out to you that for 2004, Ganguly's average with the bat in Test cricket was pretty close to most captains in the world.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Taylor was a fantastic batsman IMO; I guess what C_C is referring to is the 21-innings slump, in which he was in the side purely on account of his captaincy (and rightly so, IMO). Ironically, Australia lost the match in which he returned to form.

Taylor is one of my favourite players ever, without question, and I loved the way he went about his game. I think he is vastly underrated as a batsman.

 

[C_C]

Yes but that doesnt make him a better captain as he does not accomplish this by himself.

Actually he did achieve it pretty much by himself.
India a year before Ganguly was in disarray. India a year after Ganguly became captain was one of the most harmonious Indian teams to take the field.
Only thing that had changed was Ganguly's position in the team.

That is more to do with the coaching of the team rather than the captain as most of the team bonding is done outside of the cricket field, during training etc.

Players bonding is done during training, off field socialising etc etc. In many of which, the captain plays a vital part. You realise that in cricket, the captain often oversees the training alongside the coach ?

it gives the idian captain an unfair advantage just because india is more multiculturally diverse than australia.

umm.
How exactly is it an advantage ?It is an advantage that you gotto deal with players from a dozen different regions, perspectives and culture ? Ummm ok! thats like saying its an advantage that you get to manage the European Union than your township.
It is a handicap Indian players and captains have to deal with.
Which is a good reason why India has produced so few good/great captains in its history.
Not many people have the charisma or the diplomacy to tackle so many different groups of people....

 

[Adamc]

Taylor is one of my favourite players ever, without question, and I loved the way he went about his game. I think he is vastly underrated as a batsman.

Likewise; Taylor was my first 'favourite' player (he's since been usurped by another left-hander of Trinidadian extraction). The Edgbaston ton is still one of my favourite cricketing memories.

 

[Dasa]

Likewise; Taylor was my first 'favourite' player (he's since been usurped by another left-hander of Trinidadian extraction). The Edgbaston ton is still one of my favourite cricketing memories.

Chalk up another for the Mark Taylor fan club. Not just for the way he played, he always seemed to me to be a great sportsman (referring to sportsmanship). I even found his commentary tolerable.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

And i think its a bit narrowminded to think that a captain should lead from front especially in the trickiest situation with the bat- why bat ? why not ball ?
You are forgetting that one of the greatest captains in history of cricket -Imran Khan- was primarily a bowler.

Yeah, my mistake. Bowlers can be perfectly good captains too... although for whatever reason they usually aren't. Personally, I think Shane Warne (as well as Gilchrist) would be a better choice for captain than Ponting, excluding his off-field issues and now perhaps his age. He has a wonderfully astute tactical mind.

And like i said, you cannot evaluate captaincy by achievements- its on field decisionmaking and off field management - thats all a captain can do really.
Results are far more dependent on the performance of the individuals that make up the team than on captaincy.

Of course you can't evaluable captaincy PURELY by achievements, and especially not by win-loss ratio, but the ultimate role of the captain is to lead the team and get them to perform better.

As for blooding talent/backing talent- c'mon mate, Ganguly is easily one of the best ever in that category.

He's done a good job in that area, yes. Mind you, so has Ponting... Symonds, Lee and Kasprowicz spring to mind. But yes, that's an area where Ganguly has been very good.

A captain is not God- he isnt responsible for making the teammates improve and any claim to that is utter hogwash.
How YOU bat or bowl is in your control, not mine.
And as i explained earlier, results are extremely clouded way to judge a captain.

You can't MAKE them perform better, no, but a good captain can encourage better results from his players, with motivation, tactical moves, leading by example and so on. That's why you HAVE captains, to help the team play better.

Sure, he has had a rough year or two but it is stretching it when you say that he is a liability to the team.
Might i point out to you that for 2004, Ganguly's average with the bat in Test cricket was pretty close to most captains in the world.

I said he was a decent batsman, but struggled in the situations where a captain is most needed - under pressure. I said he was a liability in the field, and he is. He's not a liability with the bat, he's just not all that brilliant in tests, and can crumble at times. He's been a very good ODI batsman until recently of course.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Likewise; Taylor was my first 'favourite' player (he's since been usurped by another left-hander of Trinidadian extraction). The Edgbaston ton is still one of my favourite cricketing memories.

BIG Lara fan as well.

 

[PY]

I don't reckon you can be a cricket fan without being a Brian Lara fan.

That bat flourish..*drools*.

Pity he's not really made a massive impact as a captain, guess it just adds more proof that being the best player isn't necessarily a good thing for the captain.

 

[marc71178]

It doesnt take a master navigator to captain the ship when 8 outta 11 of your oarsmen come with an inbuilt compass, GPS locator and turbocharged motors for oars.

I know Gilly's ears are big, but they're not as big as turbocharged motors!

 

[C_C]

although for whatever reason they usually aren't.

I dont think bowlers are bad captains- they certainly have the accumen and pizzazz to be captains. I think the reason bowlers dont feature prominently as captains is because bowlers miss matches far more regularly than batsmen do and selectors dont really like the idea of the captain being in and out of the game.

Mind you, so has Ponting... Symonds, Lee and Kasprowicz spring to mind.

Symonds i grant you. But Lee and Kaspa ?
Both have played for quiete a while before Punter became captain and Punter didnt pluck Kaspa outta the blue like Ganguly did with Harbhajan but rather, kaspa forced his way in based on Lee's ineptitude in test cricket and Kaspa's dominance in Pura Cup.

Of course you can't evaluable captaincy PURELY by achievements, and especially not by win-loss ratio, but the ultimate role of the captain is to lead the team and get them to perform better.

Yes. And the BEST you can do is handle the off field stuff (something Ganguly has done brilliantly) and handle the on field stuff (something Ganguly has done to a good degree).
Whether a player improves or not is ultimately on the back of the players.
Mind you, under Ganguly, Kumble's overseas record has dramatically improved and which is why India has improved overseas than before ganguly. You gotto learn how to walk before you can run. In the 90s, India was pathetic outside the subcontinent. Under Ganguly, India has managed to win overseas matches with regularity.

I said he was a decent batsman, but struggled in the situations where a captain is most needed - under pressure.

He certainly isnt any great shakes under pressure but he is definately not 'ultra poor' under pressure either.
His century in the opening test of the OZ tour was a top quality knock under pressure.
He isnt superb in tests but by no means is he a slouch in test cricket either......a 40+ average after 80 tests is doing pretty decently.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I know Gilly's ears are big, but they're not as big as turbocharged motors!

Don't talk about his ears - he'll hear you.

 

[marc71178]

Indeed Scallywag is failing to see the failings in his argument.

No it's just the "He's Australian so he must be the best" argument isn't working.

 

[C_C]

I know Gilly's ears are big, but they're not as big as turbocharged motors!

ROTFL!