Cricket Player Manager
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 27 of 27

Thread: The Captains input regarding selection

  1. #16
    International Coach adharcric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Posts
    10,898
    The captain is the one who will lead the group of players on the field so he should have full confidence in their abilities. The captain should have a say, but the captain should not be biased towards anything but the best interests of the team.

  2. #17
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Autobahn
    You should read the book Rich, Mike Brearley devotes a whole chapter to it in which he basically says that a captain is unlikely to get anything out of a player he didn't want there in the first place, but at the same time needs the experience and knowledge of the other selectors to give him objectivity on the players that are up for consideration.

    The only times the first method has failed is when people don't pay attention when choosing selectors and you end-up with pig-headed types (e.g. illingworth and titmus) who don't even enter into debates with the captain.
    Have you read Opening Up? Atherton devotes much time to the explosion of the popular myth that he and Illingworth were constantly at loggerheads. He constantly repeats that they developed a grudging respect - he even goes so far as to say that they were "not poles apart in our views on most players".
    Fred Titmus he describes as "having little to offer but harmless".
    Brian Bolus was the one he had most problem with, and Nasser Hussain described him in much the same way in Playing With Fire.
    If anyone was the pig-headed type, it was Bolus.
    The second method again will cause tension within the ranks because even if the captain wanted a certain player and was ignored by the board, the player will still suspect his Captain had something to do with since there's no offical way of proving that he didn't. Plus it again relies on good selectors to take the captain's advice and not just ignore it.

    The third way is utter stupidity, Brearley re-counts that when Illingworth was manager of Yorkshire he would present Old with 12 names and discuss who would be 12th man on the morning of a match. I mean what's the point in being a captain then? Why should Old go out and have to encourage 10 men he had no hand in picking?
    If he doesn't want to he can resign the captaincy.
    Captaincy is an honour and it has certain responsibilities.
    Did Chris Old ever complain?
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  3. #18
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by adharcric
    The captain is the one who will lead the group of players on the field so he should have full confidence in their abilities. The captain should have a say, but the captain should not be biased towards anything but the best interests of the team.
    That sort of thing is wishful-thinking.

  4. #19
    International Coach adharcric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Posts
    10,898
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    That sort of thing is wishful-thinking.
    yes it is, and an appropriate unbiased captain has to be selected. i think dravid fits the bill for india, so this concept works just fine for me.


  5. #20
    International Coach adharcric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Posts
    10,898
    also, the need for the captain to have a say is more important in india (as mentioned earlier) than in other nations where politics doesn't play as much of a role in selection.

  6. #21
    Cricket Web Staff Member archie mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    canberra Australia
    Posts
    10,748
    Quote Originally Posted by Langeveldt
    I think the captain should have a large say in selection, after all, he probably knows his players better than anyone, and his neck is on the line if the team fails..
    I think he is often to close to the situation. Take Border and his good friend Geoff Marsh. I think most people could see Marsh was finished but Border would not hear of him being dropped, and when he was Border almost resigned.

    Plus take Rcky Ponting who hardly ever plays any first class cricket, how does he know which player is in form? (apart from looking at averages)
    You know it makes sense.

  7. #22
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by adharcric
    yes it is, and an appropriate unbiased captain has to be selected. i think dravid fits the bill for india, so this concept works just fine for me.
    "Unbiased" captains are virtually impossible to find. The captain is one of the team - he is always going to be involved. His team are his mates - and what with international cricket being ever more close-knit these days than it was even 10 years ago, being dropped from international cricket is more akin to being sacked than it ever has been.
    Captains can be understandibly reluctant to undertake such a thing.

  8. #23
    International Coach howardj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    brisbane
    Posts
    13,022
    Personally, I think the Captain's views should be canvassed. However, I think it is the job of the selectors to pick the team. You don't want the players in the team to feel unable to open up to the captain about any problems they are experiencing (cricket related or otherwise). This is more likely to be the case if the captain is on the selection committee.
    - Winner of the 2011 and 2012 CricketWeb AFL tipping competition

    - Winner of the 2011, 2012 and 2013 CricketWeb NRL tipping competition

  9. #24
    State 12th Man Autobahn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    716
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    Have you read Opening Up? Atherton devotes much time to the explosion of the popular myth that he and Illingworth were constantly at loggerheads. He constantly repeats that they developed a grudging respect - he even goes so far as to say that they were "not poles apart in our views on most players".
    Fred Titmus he describes as "having little to offer but harmless".
    Brian Bolus was the one he had most problem with, and Nasser Hussain described him in much the same way in Playing With Fire.
    If anyone was the pig-headed type, it was Bolus.
    Sorry about that but i always got the impression that illingworth and titmus were pig-headed.

    It's not much of an honour to lead out 9 men you haven't chosen or had any say in, and he might have been tolerated it at county level, but he only did for a year before moving to warwickshire so maybe he thought it wasn't worth kicking up a fuss about.

    Not much is written about Chris old.

  10. #25
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Indeed - one of the more underrated performers of our game.
    The impression Atherton always gives me of Titmus is the "how on Earth did he ever become a selector?" sort of one. I reckon most people on this board could do a better job, based on what Atherton writes.
    Illingworth was best described by Matthew Engel - "in times of change, learners inherit the Earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with the World that no longer exists" (NBTE, Wisden 1997).
    Atherton's view seems much the same, and he hinted as much at the time, too. Remember his comments on the Australia tour of 1994\95? Where he said he felt the selectors were too old and out-of-touch with the modern game? That was the time when he started becoming friendly with Ian Chappell, Chappell invariably going into transports of delight when someone gets into a row with the establishment.

    EDIT: the Matthew Engel quote was not written by him, but by an American educationalist who had his words pinned to the wall of a teacher friend of ME's.

  11. #26
    State 12th Man Autobahn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    716
    Right then Rich, who would you apoint as the english selectors in the case say the current ones quit?

  12. #27
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Matthew Engel, myself and David Lewis, of course.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. CW XI 101 : The Road To The Present
    By Mr Mxyzptlk in forum Statistics and Records
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 26-04-2006, 10:35 PM
  2. Your Favourite Obscure Selection
    By vic_orthdox in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 29-03-2005, 02:09 PM
  3. Captain's Say
    By Cloete in forum Cricket Web XI
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 18-01-2004, 03:24 PM
  4. Indian team selection & Captaincy
    By anzac in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 02-11-2003, 01:15 PM
  5. Why are captains mostly batsmen?
    By krkode in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 21-02-2003, 06:36 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •