Rate the captains

[Lillian Thomson]

I'm not sure that this poll has much point to it as it's too self indulgent. Surely the idea of a poll is to guage opinion. To omit four of the most successful captains of all time - Waugh-Ponting-Richards-Lloyd - doesn't make much sense. Some people do rate them and they would receive a lot of votes. All that's being rated here are the one's that the OP thinks are worthy, which is not proving anything and is of minimal interest.

 

[Richard]

It's of interest to me. If people wish to refuse to vote because they think Lloyd, Waugh or whoever was more worthy than any, that's up to them.

I'm not interested in seeing who's of the opinion that Stephen Waugh was the greatest captain ever, I'm more than aware of the consensus on that already. I am interested in seeing some discussion of others, particularly those included in the poll.

 

[Burgey]

No Close ?

Close.

But no cigar.

Takes coat

 

[99*]

Voted Flem, only one I remember watching. (think Taylor retired just before I started watching)

I've heard that Brearley was a very good captain (but a hopeless bat).

Have heard of most of the options and what they did as captain. Just never saw them in action.

 

[Flem274*]

Flem led teams chock full of pie chuckers and number 11 batsmen masquerading as our top order, and still did well.

I'm a big Steve Waugh fan, but looks like he didn't make the poll.

No - as I said in the opening post, I rate Stephen Waugh's captaincy as no more than adaquete. Certainly not close to the level of those in this poll - it didn't need to be.

And really, it's a myth that Fleming's teams did well when they truly were awful. No captain can do that, however good. New Zealand did well when they had good and decent players with them, but Fleming always made the most of whatever it was he had.

I'd put it somewhere between the two. Fleming has done well with teams that have included say, 9 good players and a couple of crappies. A few years back if we lost 4 players through injury good old Tama Canning, Iain O'Brien, Lance Hamilton, Mathew Bell etc would pop up. Thank God that now at least we have inexperienced talent (mixed with some crap of course), rather than just inexperienced rubbish.

 

[Briony]

Voted for Fleming due to him being the best in my lifetime, and captaincy is such a hard thing to truly appreciate through the history books.

Where is the proof that Fleming was a great captain or is it a myth which gets perpetuated? Statistically his record isn't great. Bear in mind he captained NZ which isn't the strongest of cricketing nations but even his limited overs record is not flash yet he was in command of some very good ODI players.

 

[Flem274*]

Where is the proof that Fleming was a great captain or is it a myth which gets perpetuated? Statistically his record isn't great. Bear in mind he captained NZ which isn't the strongest of cricketing nations but even his limited overs record is not flash yet he was in command of some very good ODI players.

Command of some very good ODI players, most of whom (mainly bowlers, with some batsmen) got injured constantly and then some rabble surrounding those good players, or is Matt Bell a good batsman now?

 

[SJS]

Bradman was never thought to have been a particularly outstanding captain, merely adaquete and of course a phenomenal batsman; Collins I know little to nothing about as his time was before the 1930s and I only know bits and pieces there (hence McLaren); and Hassett I did consider, but while he did a good job I don't think he's up with the very best.


Pelham Warner I could have included I suppose, but I didn't think there a lot of point in mentioning the likes of Close, Sellers, Surridge or Rice because few on this board have read enough of historical domestic cricket to know much of their skill. I myself don't know that much. I thought it best to keep it to those who have achieved notable deeds at international level.

Cheetham is an interesting one, though. I wonder, sometimes, about a Cheetham vs Bacher poll, and whether anyone would even post.

Agreed

 

[DJellett]

Voted Fleming.

Genius.

 

[gettingbetter]

Don't really see the point TBH, you could name Joe Higgins who once captained Village Specials XI there.

By-and-large, if you have a lengthy spell as a Test captain, you can't be bad.

Really? Not exactly sure how long they were captains but Bothan, Tendulkar, Pollock, Hughes and so on where good players in there own right, but once captain, they and there teams suffered.

 

[Briony]

Command of some very good ODI players, most of whom (mainly bowlers, with some batsmen) got injured constantly and then some rabble surrounding those good players, or is Matt Bell a good batsman now?

But lost more than he won. To really prove genius, as someone else suggested he was, surely you have to value add? A true genius would have his players 'overachieving'. I think the NZ teams/ players as on balance performed to expectations. I believe the Fleming is great captain cry has become a mythical mantra.

A further example is that Smith is univerally considered a poor captain yet gets some good results considering the teams are compromised by the quota system. I doubt he ever really gets the team he wants. And SA has never had a quality spinner.

To really test a skipper's worth it would be interesting to put Punter in charge of the kiwis and Fleming in charge of the Aussies. BTW I also feel that Fleming never as the leader of the team made the tough runs when it really counted.

 

[Richard]

Really? Not exactly sure how long they were captains but Bothan, Tendulkar, Pollock, Hughes and so on where good players in there own right, but once captain, they and there teams suffered.

And none captained for any real length of time, bar Kim Hughes whose team didn't really suffer as much due to him as is sometimes painted.

And are you referring to Shaun Pollock there? There was nothing wrong with Pollock's captaincy at all. Nor was there much to shout about with it, but he was far from poor, very far indeed.

 

[Richard]

A further example is that Smith is univerally considered a poor captain yet gets some good results considering the teams are compromised by the quota system.

I'm not sure he is. No-one rates his captaincy as something special, because it isn't, but I don't think anyone other than those who have a rabid, irrational hatred of him (and they do number a decent few) thinks he's a poor captain.

Most people prepared to offer a fair assessment of him say he does a decent job. Not an outstanding one (there are thought to be at least a couple who might do better) but a more than acceptible one.

 

[Richard]

Another thing I think would be good would be to pick a "best from each Test team".

I'd go something like...
Australia - Benaud
England - Brearley
India - Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi
New Zealand - Fleming
Pakistan - Imran Khan
South Africa - Ali Bacher
Sri Lanka - Ranatunga
West Indies - Worrell
Zimbabwe - Houghton

 

[subshakerz]

Another thing I think would be good would be to pick a "best from each Test team".

I'd go something like...
Australia - Benaud
England - Brearley
India - Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi
New Zealand - Fleming
Pakistan - Imran Khan
South Africa - Ali Bacher
Sri Lanka - Ranatunga
West Indies - Worrell
Zimbabwe - Houghton

I think both Ian Chappell and Mark Taylor have good claims to be top Aussie skipper.

 

[Richard]

Yeah, they do, especially Chappell.

TBH, though, from what I've read about Benaud he "embraced" (if that's the right word) defence a bit more than Chappell did - he saw how defence could be both the best way to go of times and sometimes even the best form of attack - witness he himself turning the wristspin-around-the-wicket line into a deadly one in 1961.

Chappell, from everything I've read (and indeed heard from the man himself), placed a little too much emphasis on attack. Mostly, with his teams, he could afford to, like that most hated successor of his Stephen Waugh.

The best captains must always be able to both attack and defend and never shy away or even consider so from doing either.

Australia, with Armstrong, Woodfull and those three have undoubtedly produced more fine captains than any other cricketing nation.

 

[funnygirl]

Mark Taylor ,the reason why Aussies became invincibles, in my opinion . Then the older ones ,i don't remember that much .So from those i watched .

 

[Richard]

You never watched Imran?

 

[funnygirl]

Imran khan was great ,but for pure captaincy skills ,i choose Taylor ,he was more aggressive than Khan ,IMO .

 

[Michaelf7777777]

Australia: Bradman
England: Brearley
India: Nawab of Pataudi jr
New Zealand: Fleming
Pakistan: Imran Kahn
Sri Lanka: Ranatunga
South Africa: Cheetham
West Indies: Worrell