• 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.

Good example of how Stats can be misleading - A comparison of captains.

I

Ilovecric

U19 Cricketer
Which Test captains had the greatest effect on their team's fortunes? (thecricketmonthly.com)

I saw the above article on cricinfo's website and thought to myself, I bet Clive Lloyd is going to dominate this greatest effect assessment. The man regarded as one of the best captains ever barely made the list after dominating the game for years! I don't even see Mark Taylor on the list who was also an amazing captain! Stats don't always mean much TBH! And we need to be careful how we throw them around and review them. Lloyd built the greatest and most successful cricket team and Mark Taylor built the second greatest, both captains created a structure that ensured their teams were successful even after they retired. If you're doing a review and legends aren't present on your list, kindly reconsider the criteria you're evaluating.

Here are some suggested areas that should have been assessed

Won the toss and won the game lol
Series won, can you believe this wasn't analyzed ?
The success of team post-retirement
Winning games, series after being down etc
 
Coronis

Coronis

International Coach
Ilovecric said:
Which Test captains had the greatest effect on their team's fortunes? (thecricketmonthly.com)

I saw the above article on cricinfo's website and thought to myself, I bet Clive Lloyd is going to dominate this greatest effect assessment. The man regarded as one of the best captains ever barely made the list after dominating the game for years! I don't even see Mark Taylor on the list who was also an amazing captain! Stats don't always mean much TBH! And we need to be careful how we throw them around and review them. Lloyd built the greatest and most successful cricket team and Mark Taylor built the second greatest, both captains created a structure that ensured their teams were successful even after they retired. If you're doing a review and legends aren't present on your list, kindly reconsider the criteria you're evaluating.

Here are some suggested areas that should have been assessed

Won the toss and won the game lol
Series won, can you believe this wasn't analyzed ?
The success of team post-retirement
Winning games, series after being down etc
Click to expand...
iirc Bradman’s still the only captain to win a 5 test series after being down 0-2
 
wpdavid

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
It's an interesting read, albeit too long. I was pleased to see Geoff Howarth so highly rated as I feel he generally ignored in these conversations. But I think the methodology for calculating value added (comparing the results under the new captain to the last 10 matches before he took over) is simplistic and in some cases, misleading. Take Brearley for instance. The 10 games before he originally took over were against the 1976 WI side, away to India and the Centenary Test in Australia. His run of fixtures weren't nearly as challenging, for all sorts of reasons. A few years later, his second spell in charge immediately followed back to back series against WI.

fwiw the England captains who added the most value in my life time are Vaughan, Strauss and Stokes. Brearley and Illingworth were fine captains, but their track records benefited by so many things being in their favour.

EDIT
I just read his conclusion where he lists Lloyd, Waugh and Ponting amongst the five captains he would want in charge of an all time XI. To my mind, that's just lazy thinking, simplistically based in their win percentages without considering little matters such as the quality of players at their disposal and the quality of the opposition.
 
Last edited:
wpdavid

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Line and Length said:
Clive Lloyd achieved great things for WI by getting players from different islands (countries) to gel as a team. For mine he was something special.
Click to expand...
I've always found Lloyd very willing to trumpet his own achievements as captain, but he didn't exactly inherit a ****-show. From a purely English pov, the side led by Kanhai in 1973 beat us just as comprehensively as the side led by Lloyd in 1976. Ditto the sides led by Sobers and Worrall in the 1960s. And lets face it, having your tenure coincide with the emergence of Richards, Greenidge, Roberts, Holding and Daniel (and a bit later Croft and Garner) isn't the worst hand that life can give you.
 
Slifer

Slifer

International Captain
wpdavid said:
I've always found Lloyd very willing to trumpet his own achievements as captain, but he didn't exactly inherit a ****-show. From a purely English pov, the side led by Kanhai in 1973 beat us just as comprehensively as the side led by Lloyd in 1976. Ditto the sides led by Sobers and Worrall in the 1960s. And lets face it, having your tenure coincide with the emergence of Richards, Greenidge, Roberts, Holding and Daniel (and a bit later Croft and Garner) isn't the worst hand that life can give you.
Click to expand...
That's because you know nothing about the politics among the islands in the WI. Under Lloyd, players from the Leeward and Windward islands were finally given an extended chance to play for the WI hence: Roberts and Viv.

Not a schitt show? The win vs England in '73 was the WI only win in like 7 or so series before that. WI even lost at home to India. Then Lloyd was made captain of a very green team on a long tough tour to India in 74-75 that they barely scraped through winning 3-2. Then came a draw away to Pakistan then a mauling down under in 75- 76. Are you keeping score, WI had won 2 out of 10 or so series by the time Lloyd had taken over.

Then he learned from his experiences in Australia, used India as guinea pigs in '76 and the rest is history.
 
wpdavid

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Slifer said:
That's because you know nothing about the politics among the islands in the WI. Under Lloyd, players from the Leeward and Windward islands were finally given an extended chance to play for the WI hence: Roberts and Viv.

Not a schitt show? The win vs England in '73 was the WI only win in like 7 or so series before that. WI even lost at home to India. Then Lloyd was made captain of a very green team on a long tough tour to India in 74-75 that they barely scraped through winning 3-2. Then came a draw away to Pakistan then a mauling down under in 75- 76. Are you keeping score, WI had won 2 out of 10 or so series by the time Lloyd had taken over.

Then he learned from his experiences in Australia, used India as guinea pigs in '76 and the rest is history.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm aware of the WI's record in the early 1970s, including the home losses to India and NZ, but thank you anyway. A more intelligent analysis would at least take a look at the line-ups in those series, especially the bowling attacks, compared to the guys available to Lloyd. What you'll see is one world class bowler in Gibbs, an ageing Sobers and, at the end of the 1960s, an ageing Wes Hall. Plus a bunch of guys that really shouldn't have been there. So what those results illustrate is a WI side that was strong in the batting, but rarely looked like bowling sides out. And that's the reason for one win in 7 series or so. Now if you really take a different view of the WI attacks in the early 1970s/late 1960s and don't agree that Lloyd had vastly superior blokes at his disposal, then we'll just have to agree to differ,

Things had already begun to improve under Kanhai, notably the improvement of Boyce and the arrival of Julien, hence the 1973 win in England. So things were beginning to look up even before Lloyd took over, even though they only drew the return series against England in 1974. Were Roberts and Richards really excluded from the WI side due to regional issues before Lloyd took over? I don't recall Viv mentioning this in his autobiography. Roberts had already played a test or two earlier in 1974, and both were, I think, only 22 or 23 when they made their first test appearances, which suggests that they had simply been too young previously. Which isn't to say that the regional politics didn't exist, but that you are over-stating its importance.
 
Last edited:
Slifer

Slifer

International Captain
wpdavid said:
Yes, I'm aware of the WI's record in the early 1970s, including the home losses to India and NZ, but thank you anyway. A more intelligent analysis would at least take a look at the line-ups in those series, especially the bowling attacks, compared to the guys available to Lloyd. What you'll see is one world class bowler in Gibbs, an ageing Sobers and, at the end of the 1960s, an ageing Wes Hall. Plus a bunch of guys that really shouldn't have been there. So what those results illustrate is a WI side that was strong in the batting, but rarely looked like bowling sides out. And that's the reason for one win in 7 series or so. Now if you really take a different view of the WI attacks in the early 1970s/late 1960s and don't agree that Lloyd had vastly superior blokes at his disposal, then we'll just have to agree to differ,

Things had already begun to improve under Kanhai, notably the improvement of Boyce and the arrival of Julien, hence the 1973 win in England. So things were beginning to look up even before Lloyd took over, even though they only drew the return series against England in 1974. Were Roberts and Richards really excluded from the WI side due to regional issues before Lloyd took over? I don't recall Viv mentioning this in his autobiography. Roberts had already played a test or two earlier in 1974, and both were, I think, only 22 or 23 when they made their first test appearances, which suggests that they had simply been too young previously. Which isn't to say that the regional politics didn't exist, but that you are over-stating its importance.
Click to expand...
The first time a player was chosen from the Leeward Islands to play for the WI, was in 1973. So Lloyd being among the selectors (being captain and all) made sure that players no matter where they came from in the region were given a fair shake. He also made sure that players from different territories inter-mingled ie players from Barbados roomed with Guyanese players, or Jamaicans, or Antiguans etc.

You say I overstate Caribbean politics but excuse me but I'm literally from there, you're not. Even to this day, it's an issue. And it'll continue to be so long as the WI exists in its current iteration.

Lloyd didn't just waive some magic wand and have dream players drop in his lap. He scouted them from around the region. He also insisted (from WSC experiences) that they were fit, hence Dennis Waite. I could go on, but this is getting tedious.
 
A

AndrewB

International Vice-Captain
Coronis said:
iirc Bradman’s still the only captain to win a 5 test series after being down 0-2
Click to expand...
That (1936-7) was a weird series though, as the results of 4 of the 5 Tests (1, 2, 3 and 5) were heavily influenced by rain falling at a crucial point in the game - though to be fair, England would probably have won the 1st Test and Australia the 5th Test anyway. IIRC Bradman himself once said that 3-2 to Aus was a fair result, because the rain won 2 Tests for each team, and Australia won the other one.

Have any captains other than Brearley taken over a side during a series while it was losing, and won it?
 
Coronis

Coronis

International Coach
Apparently accurate up to 2009 - most tests as captain without a series loss. (unsure if anyone new gets added to the list.

Viv - 50
Benaud - 28
Bradman - 24
Hutton - 23
 
wpdavid

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
AndrewB said:
Have any captains other than Brearley taken over a side during a series while it was losing, and won it?
Click to expand...
I know Peter has already answered this (and I'm with you about remembering what happened 40 years ago far more clearly than what happened two years ago), but I'll throw in two England captains who made a significant impact when taking over a side during a series albeit not fully meeting your criteria.

Percy Chapman in the 1926 Ashes took charge for the final test after four drawn matches and England won by a lot for their first Ashes win since WW1. It was the match when Hobbs and Sutcliffe put on that massive 3rd innings partnership on a tricky pitch to set a huge target and Rhodes led the way with the ball. In fact they had been absolutely thrashed in the three previous series, so presumably the bunting was out in force.

Alec Stewart's contribution at Lord's against WI in 2000, standing in for the injured Hussain, is, imo, wrongly ignored. England had been soundly beaten in the first test, carrying on their wretched form from the previous summer against NZ and away to SA and, sure enough they conceded a big first innings deficit in this match. I don't what Stewart said during the innings break, but you know full well what happened next. Without the Miracle of Lord's, we're not winning that series in any way, shape or fashion. As a side issue, I do feel that Hussain's impact on the test side is somewhat over-stated when you look at the actual results before and during his tenure. The exception would be the winter tours of Pakistan and SL, tbf. But I guess that people do like their myths.
 
I

Ilovecric

U19 Cricketer
Coronis said:
Apparently accurate up to 2009 - most tests as captain without a series loss. (unsure if anyone new gets added to the list.

Viv - 50
Benaud - 28
Bradman - 24
Hutton - 23
Click to expand...
These are stats that actually reflect on a captain lol These people out here measuring toss won lol with nothing after! So annoyed!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top